Question to Brits: which world war was a bigger trauma?

[Josquius]

I wonder....what if the Germans did as suggested. Hold the French in the west and concentrate on Russia....might not the French then end  up being th  ones to attempt to get at Germany via Belgium? that would be interesting for Britain. they're obviously not going to attack the French but they would be in a dodgy spot.

No Britain in the war- might this also lead to Italy joining the war on the side of the allies? Not for a while I wager but they would want to push some of their claims, even if they're not their favourite ones

[grumbler]

WW1 in the East unfolds much differently in the scenario where the Germans don't assault France; there would be no need for an early attack on Prussia, and thus the largely veteran First and Second Armies wouldn't be annihilated.

Germany gambling its national existence on Belgium remaining neutral strikes me as unlikely; the forces Germany could send against Russia would be far less than they did historically send against France, because they would need to guard their entire frontier, not just Alsace and Lorraine.  I don't see Germany wining such a war, and don't see Britain staying out of it.

[Sheilbh]

Incidentally I recently read about some of the proposals for 2014 commemorations, which I think indicate that WWI was a larger trauma. They include flying all official flags at half-mast for the day and ringing the church bells across the country on Armistice Day at the eleventh hour.

[Syt]

WW1 is hardly commemorated in Germany because it is dwarfed by the shadow of WW2. There's been a few documentaries in recent years, but the closest to commemorating WW1 is that carnival season starts on Nov 11th, 11:11 am.

Then again, German history pre-WW2 gets largely ignored with the occasional exception of people like Bismarck, Frederick the Great or Martin Luther.

[Martinus]

Thanks for very informative posts, guys. I started this thread while watching Downton Abbey, where the trauma of WWI features prominently during the second season.

[Martinus]

Incidentally I recently read about some of the proposals for 2014 commemorations, which I think indicate that WWI was a larger trauma. They include flying all official flags at half-mast for the day and ringing the church bells across the country on Armistice Day at the eleventh hour.

Which is interesting considering noone who was an adult (and hardly anyone who was alive) during WWI lives today, but there is a whole lot of people who did during WWII.

[Tamas]

When was there more switch between how the world and people's everyday life looked like?
1913 and 1920ish
or 1938 and late 1940s?

[Richard Hakluyt]

Incidentally I recently read about some of the proposals for 2014 commemorations, which I think indicate that WWI was a larger trauma. They include flying all official flags at half-mast for the day and ringing the church bells across the country on Armistice Day at the eleventh hour.

Which is interesting considering noone who was an adult (and hardly anyone who was alive) during WWI lives today, but there is a whole lot of people who did during WWII.

A further point to make is that WW2 was a fairly direct result of WW1. IIRC Clemenceau said something to the effect that "This is not a peace. It is an armistice for twenty years". Nearly 100 years on and the causes of WW1 are still a matter of intense debate, whereas the causes of WW2 seem straightforward. It all went wrong in August 1914 and Britain was a bit of a loser in the new world created by that, having been a winner and major beneficiary of the long peace before that.

[Martinus]

When was there more switch between how the world and people's everyday life looked like?
1913 and 1920ish
or 1938 and late 1940s?

I'd say it depends on a country, again. For example, in Britian, WW1 significantly upset the class society so I would say it brought a much greater change in everybody's life. For the US, I would definitely say that it was WW2, which ushered in the completely new era.

Then you have countries like Poland or Russia which had massive political upheavals associated with the wars, which changed the lifestyle of everyone in a much more dramatic fashion (but for Poland I would say it is still WW2, as pre-WW2 Poland was a very much a class society, like Britain pre-WW1).

[Razgovory]

When was there more switch between how the world and people's everyday life looked like?
1913 and 1920ish
or 1938 and late 1940s?

The 1913-1920ish.  Just look  at the art after WWI.  The poetry, the painting, the sculpture. It all cries out despair and cynicism and exhaustion.  Compare it the the joy, self assurance and pride before the war.  In truth, Europe still hasn't recovered.

[Martinus]

When was there more switch between how the world and people's everyday life looked like?
1913 and 1920ish
or 1938 and late 1940s?

The 1913-1920ish.  Just look  at the art after WWI.  The poetry, the painting, the sculpture. It all cries out despair and cynicism and exhaustion.  Compare it the the joy, self assurance and pride before the war.  In truth, Europe still hasn't recovered.

Again, when you talk about Europe, it really just means the great powers. For example, in Poland's case, the period of 20 years between wars was pretty cheerful, culturally, especially in the beginning. Only when fascism/authoritarism started to raise its ugly head in the 30s, it began to get gloomy.

[Tamas]

When was there more switch between how the world and people's everyday life looked like?
1913 and 1920ish
or 1938 and late 1940s?

I'd say it depends on a country, again. For example, in Britian, WW1 significantly upset the class society so I would say it brought a much greater change in everybody's life. For the US, I would definitely say that it was WW2, which ushered in the completely new era.

Then you have countries like Poland or Russia which had massive political upheavals associated with the wars, which changed the lifestyle of everyone in a much more dramatic fashion (but for Poland I would say it is still WW2, as pre-WW2 Poland was a very much a class society, like Britain pre-WW1).

I deliberately set the deadline to avoid the reintroduction of feudalism in eastern europe by the Soviets, as it is not relevant.

[Martinus]

Communist Poland had many faults, but reintroducing feudalism was not one of them. Pre-WW2 Poland was an extremely class-based society, with a lot of lower class/rural people being illiterate, while the aristocracy and the rich lived in palaces, served by dozens of people. Communists completely changed that.

I am as anti-communist as they come, but I am annoyed by the stupid, knee-jerk anti-communism of the uneducated people in our part of Europe that is not based in facts. True, the post-war communist propaganda has depicted the pre-war situation in Poland, Hungary, etc. in the worst possible light, going out of its way to smear anyone who was not a communist, but it is equally irritating to see the changes brought forth by communism as universally bad.

[Tamas]

It made education accessible for the poor, I give you that. It also stole the property of everyone who had any worth stealing.

But in effect, those who did not go to work in factories switched from toiling away in private owned agriculture to state owned agriculture. And since you:
a) HAD to work, and all work was state owned
b) were not allowed to start a private enterprise

it had no noticable difference from feudalism, apart from propaganda and coating.

[Martinus]

Well, I guess Poland was an exception again, since you were allowed to start small private businesses here (including farms, shops and service outlets). The only area where the state had a monopoly was industrial production.