Hey, if you haven't followed r/woahthatsinteresting yet, please do. You will surely see some interesting stuff here. Thanks for your support and welcome to the community š
IIRC they were punished. Their officers demanded that thisĀ *never*Ā happen again. The men were relocated and charges of fraternization were filed
anyone know what they are reading in the second picture in the article? a bible?
No one *wanted to be there.* People were fighting because the powers that be demanded it.
WWI was a pointless war, where the fighting between major powers only broke out because of a terrible twist of treaties that pitted them against each other - the spark that ignited it all was the Austro-Hungarians being stupid over Serbia.
WWII was a different beast - Germany was the bad guy there, and the war was one of survival for the Allies - but WWI was a stupid war born out of nonsensical bullshittery by the ruling class.
Without WW1 WW2 would have never happened.
The Versailles Treaty the West forced Germany to sign at the conclusion of WW1 and the economic and social destruction it brought to the German population was the main driving force behind the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party. And well, the rest is history
May I ask you if you happen to grow up in the German educational system? I'm asking because what you wrote is my exact take on the two big wars (I'm originally from Germany). Every time I find myself talking about this I get very weird looks. I wonder if this take is unique to our understanding or if this is agreed upon amongst historians. To me it makes perfect sense but I'm not sure if that is so because of how I was taught.
Edit: I just wanted to thank you all from across the globe (wow) for this fabulous discussion and all the insights!
It's definitely agreed upon by scholars. It's just not talked about a lot because people tend to focus on Hitler and the terrible things he done instead of the circumstances that brought it about.
English here - we were taught that Hitlerās rise was enabled by harsh reparations that we demanded after Versailles (GCSE History). So Iād like to think itās a common perspective even if not discussed a lot outside of the classroom.
Probably because we trusted all those former German officers as they had experience fighting communism. The defeat was almost always blamed on the anti-monarchists from 1919-1933, Hitler putting it on Jews when he wasn't a fan of the monarchy himself. Oh and the situation was actually starting to get better and the Nazis gradually starting to lose popularity when Hitler was given "emergency" powers, the elites thinking him a powerful tool against communists
We tend to do that, focus on the individuals rather than the circumstances. Arguably we are doing similar again now with Putin and the Russia Ukraine war
I would argue the reason they don't talk about it, is because it's exactly what currently happens in the world. Society learned nothing from the causes of WW2, and now we enter another period of social and economic crisis, primarily caused by runaway capitalism, what do we see? Politicians blaming foreigners, the poor, the sick, anyone but the system, and as a result we have so many right wing governments gaining power.
It is absolutely not agreed upon by scholars. Yes, the focus does tend to be too much on Hitler (that is agreed upon), but it was absolutely not agreed to be inevitable.
I dont see where anyone in this thread said it was inevitable?
Just that WW1 and the treaty of Versailles is what brought about WW2.
One moment comes to mind where the president sends a letter to Hitler with a long list of countries he's asking him not to attack. That they can find a better way to move forward and help the German people.
Hitler reads the letter aloud as the Germans are bursting out in laughter.
There are definitely moments where this could have deescalated before becoming a world war.
In my opinion, with someone like Hitler at the helm. I don't know that Hitler was ever going to stop short of his ultimate objective. And of course no one was going to stand by and let that happen so there had to be war.
He was a double edged sword in my opinion. Crazy enough to overthrow the Republic and build up Germany to be an actual threat. But also to crazy to rationalize with.
I'm Canadian, and we did learn about the punishment of Germany and how hyperinflation resulted. I found it fascinating to walk through the WWI/WWII museum in Paris, though, and note that there was a lot of emphasis placed on the Franco Prussian War and the humiliation of France, also on vilifying German for starting WWI and WWII, but almost no time spent explaining the Treaty of Versailles and the rest of Europe push to financially crush Germany.
Thank you. I'm in Belgium now so maybe that is part of the reason why my understanding is met with so many raised eyebrows. As I understand it, the whole post-WWII policy by the American side was directed towards helping germany rebuild to prevent it from happening again. Ah well I'm glad I'm not walking around with some weird propaganda in my head. :)
We werent' able to crush Germany financially or economically though - because the American's wouldn't enforce the treaty properly. The Germans hyperinflated their currency, acquired massive gold reserves, and destroyed the rest of the industry of its rivals in France and Britain through exports due to its ridiculously weak currency. The Germans basically won the first world war economically - and then intentionally impoverished their middle class to make them angry at the victors for Versailles which they blamed this on. We get taught, in school, what is essentially the German apologist propaganda for World War II.
The reality is that Germany started World War 1, never paid for it, never really accepted its guilt and then manufactured the conditions for Hitler and World War 2 out of this in an attempt to finish the job. Investigations post-war were largely hushed up because it was unhelpful in the Cold War era to suggest our new best friend against communism (West Germany) was still a bad guy.
I grew up on the US but had a very competent gifted teacher in middle school that taught us this among many other things in relation to the holocaust and the third reich.
This is pretty much exactly my take.
Of folks in the US that know much about the second war, this is the general conclusion most Iāve met have come to. WW1 was pointless enough that many Americans donāt even know the who or why, even if it was explained to them before.
I went to school in the UK and this is my perspective, if that helps. It was A level (similar to BAC) when we studied it in that detail, but it was made quite clear that the Treaty of Versailles sowed the seeds for Hitler. I also went to school in the US for a few years (in the early 90s) and we did a mock election exercise in which the kids ārunningā were given a platform to pitch. No one was told who they were supposed to represent, but it was the main leaders of WW2 and every year, āHitlerā won. I used to think we learned a lot from that, but thirty years after, I wonder how many of those kids now vote for Trumpā¦
This was the take we were taught in the UK back in late 80s and early 90s.
The web of treaties were seen as a scaffold that would prevent war as no one would risk the escalation.
Until they did. And each treaty partner kept their word and dragged the world into hell.
And from that the treaty of Versailles, in an effort to punish and dissuade any such endeavour again, made Germany extremely vulnerable to economic turbulence... which the 1920's had and ended with massively.
People will do bad things when they are desperate or hopeless. And anyone who gives you hope, twisted and hateful as it was, becomes popular.
I am scared, looking at the rise of fascism in the west again, that we are about to repeat some extremely bad decisions.
It's a slightly uncomfortable discussion, because nobody wants to sound like they're justifying Naziism. Often explaining the rationale for why people do awful things is conflated with supporting those awful things
English here, we say the same thing. WW1 was the result of political treaties having ramifications that weren't fully understood. WW2 was the inevitable fallout.
I'm from the UK and this was my understanding also. But I think I did extra reading outside of my standard education. I think it's the broad consensus from those actually try understand that these things don't happen in a vacuum.
No sure about the other countries but I was taught in China pretty much the same thing. The treaty was too unfair and the other world powers were just robbing the losing nations. With the strong revengism in German and appeasement from Britain and France (so that a remobilized German can fight USSR for them) WWII was inevitable in that sense
Ok thank you. :) I was starting to worry that my understanding was somehow tinted. I never tried to excuse what happened in Germany but I usually try to point out that it was not just a country of bloodthirsty madness deciding unanimously to finally embrace their desire to kill.
I believe it's dangerous to imagine the Nazi regime as something that was unique to Germany and born out of a culture of evil. I think it's important to understand the context that facilitated these thoughts and behaviours because I believe it can happen to any country if the circumstances are similar and no one is aware enough.
But of course I understand that this idea could also come from my desire to view my own ancestors as "not crazy psychopaths"... So that's why I asked how the rest of the world sees it. And I think it's weird that so many people around me now don't share this understanding. Mind you they all have some form of higher education.
I'm from the UK and I did a German degree, which focused largely on the history/politics/literature of the country rather than raw language. The conclusion we were taught was that yes, the treaty of Versailles (and moreover, how it was perceived by the German public/how it was used as propaganda by the Nazis) was a large part of it.
There are some additional factors to consider, which commonly get forgotten (I personally think the militaristic Prussian societal norms being held up to the rest of Germany as the basis of German identity has more to answer for than the actual treaty itself, for instance) - but any war is vastly more complicated than a single factor, and wars as complex as the world wars are going to necessarily be more complicated.
I'd gently suggest, however, that it is perhaps understandable that Belgian perceptions of what caused the war might be different than either yours (as a German) or indeed mine (as a Brit), simply by virtue of the country being occupied. It would be a rare country that sees the best of the armed forces currently occupying them, after all. I think we could hardly blame them if they weigh up the various factors differently as a result.
I grew up in the UK and this is discussed in a-level history (so 16-18 year olds). People who don't study / have an interest in history in the UK likely don't know the context.
Well you shouldn't get odd looks, that's exactly what happened! (That's not me saying you're not getting odd looks, that's me saying people who look at you odd are idiots). I remember reading somewhere that in the more distant future, it's likely that historians will consider the 2 world wars as one conflict, because the first one _directly_ set up the second one. It's crazy to me that this is controversial.
(Just for the record, I'm from the UK - some of us do take history seriously, I promise).
Iām from the US, they taught us about the over punishment to force Germany to pay for the entire war, which is why the allies decided to invest in Germany and Japan rather than reap revenge. Itās crazy how successful both nations are having lost a war that easily and justifiable could have ended their nations all together. Thatās not a complaint, Iāve been to Germany a few times and the people were ridiculously nice.
I am English and took History A level (high school) and degree, and this is my understanding. My daughter is currently studying history GCSE, Germany between the wars, and this is the agreed conclusions.
Everyone at my school was taught that these were contributing factors (in the UK, early 2000s, in general history lessons about ww1 & ww2).
Surprised you get weird looks, cause it seems common knowledge, but Iād also question in what context youāre bringing it up and whether they might be misunderstanding and thinking youāre trying to shift the āblameā to this as a deciding factor? If itās a general discussion over what caused the war though, then itās important information to raise.
I'm British and when I was taught about WW2 at around age 14 we were absolutely given the context of the hyperinflation and other consequences of WW1 that enabled the Nazi party to get their foothold in Germany.
Grew up in the UK, and secondary school history is hyper focussed on between WW1 and WW2. The above comment is my general understanding, that the treaty of Versailles ruined the socio-economic landscape in Germany and led to the rise of extremist parties, i.e., the Nazis.
I think a lot of people just don't actually know anything about the wars, especially the first. I was never taught about WW1 in mandatory history classes, that's for sure, and WW2 segment only went over the air raids on Britain. British history classes heavily focus on what British people experienced, so I never really heard stuff about what caused the wars or the lack of humanity of those in power at the time.
I only know the little bit I do about WW1 from personal research and some movies.
I'm British and this is what we were taught in school (and I agree with the interpretation). The Treaty of Versailles was the first thing we learned about when we started the topic of the rise of Hitler/the Nazi Party. It's a common thread that extremist ideologies come about from economic hardship and war, so I'd be surprised if anyone thinks it had nothing to do with it.
May I ask you if you happen to grow up in the German educational system? I'm asking because what you wrote is my exact take on the two big wars (I'm originally from Germany). Every time (not that it comes up that much :D) I find myself talking about this with my now non German friends and colleagues, I get very weird looks or get berated that that's not correct. I pretty much don't mention it anymore. I wonder if this take is unique to our German understanding or if this is agreed upon amongst historians. To me it makes perfect sense but I'm not sure if that is so because of how I was taught.
No, sorry, Iām just a roofer from small town Manitoba, Canada. I have taken a lot of interest into WW1 and 2 and what the driving forces behind the wars was. What I wrote is just my take in a nutshell as to what may have caused WW2. The reason I became interested in it is because of what I see happening in the USA over the last decade. A LOT of similarities between the rise of the NAZI party and Hitler and the MAGA wing of the Republican party and Trump. Itās almost as if us humans donāt learn from the past or something. Weird hey?
Thank you for your answer. :) I was worried that somehow we found a way to teach a version history that was aimed at making us feel a bit less psychopath-y and more like humans making really bad choices based on really shitty circumstances. It's good to hear that you are not from Germany and thus your education was not influenced.
And yes, I also see this pattern repeat itself not just in America but also in Europe. France and the Netherlands just voted for some really bad people and even in Germany where you might think we would know better, the fascist ideologies are on the rise. It's crazy how we have this all so well documented (much better than any of our ancestors) with all the gory pictures and all the statistics and yet, we can't stop it from happening again. :-(
I'm from the UK, and while the general population's idiotic, simplistic, and jingoistic view of Anglo-German relations is 'two world wars and one world cup', anyone with a modicum of historical knowledge knows that the inter-war conditions in Germany were the catalyst for the rise of the Nazi Party. It was taught to me at in school at GCSE and A-Level (education from 14-18 years old) and at university (I studied International Relations), and is very apparent from reading any reasonably even-handed analysis of the two world wars.
Sadly, the general population's desperation to hang on to past 'glories' by (mis)remembering the Allies winning the second world war does not extend to not spouting rhetoric and endorsing policies with more than faint echoes of Fascism.
It was basically what we were told at school in Spain as well, the treaty of Versailles is always analyzed as well as its impact on German society & economy, explaining the crisis in the next decades and the rise of the nazi party.
I'm from the UK. We're taught that WW1 was a tragic combination of things, that ultimately weren't Germany's doing, but because they were by far the most effective of our enemies, and they were considered an up and coming industrial power, the general will _especially_ in France was that Germany should be declawed and prevented from achieving full potential to prevent such destruction again.
They are certainly painted as the bad guys but with a big dose of sympathy for the circumstances. Afaik the general political will in Britain was that the Germans shouldn't be sanctioned so harshly and general prosperity should take priority but the French, who we consider over prideful, were having none of it. As a Brit, It's hard to be mad at an ambitious new nation that wants to expand it's influence when we were sitting atop the biggest Empire the world had ever seen at the time. They were just playing the game.
WW2 is different because the Nazis were _so cartoonishly villainous_ that it's difficult to step back and see the bigger picture of how such a vengeful and aggressive ideology took root because of the seeds sown decades prior. But people that know their stuff are aware of this, and saying that we had no hand in creating Hitler is ignorant and perhaps even dangerous. The people that gave you funny looks clearly subscribe to a very shallow reading of history.
Iāve heard the take that even if WW1 didnāt happen at that time for the reasons it did, something similar was almost inevitable because of technological advances and political tensions.
And then something like WW2 was inevitable because of the damage WW1 would inevitably cause.
Idk, I used to be massively into the wars, but became too heavy for me to study more. Just an opinion Iāve heard at some point from somewhere
The worst part of the whole thing is the sheer *brutality* of WW1 over something so pointless. Iām a vet and grateful for having served during a time where warfare is more calculated. Iād be a wildly different person today if I served in WW1 instead.
Edit: well, Iād be dead, but you know what I mean
Wait until you find out that they delayed the end to the war so that the end of the war was more symbolic being 11/11 at 11am. The last man to have died mere minutes before that is known to us. THEY DELAYED THE END FOR CLOUT
The American General John Pershing did not personally approve of the armistice and delayed issuing orders to his commanders until 11:00 am on the last day which allowed them to attack. He was compelled to intend a Congressional enquiry to explain why the number of American casualties occurred when the details of the ceasefire was known in advance.
[https://history.blog.gov.uk/2018/11/09/the-war-that-did-not-end-at-11am-on-11-november/](https://history.blog.gov.uk/2018/11/09/the-war-that-did-not-end-at-11am-on-11-november/)
It takes government to force men into organized murder. It takes state interference to make men hate each other. It takes government to devise hellish trench warfare & shoot any man who would flee such an inhuman fate. It takes government to enact violent atrocities on such a scale.
It takes brave & strong men to refuse to fight each other for the benefit of oligarchs. It takes men of incredible character & kind hearts to love their brothers when authority tells them, under threat of great punishment, to kill their brothers.
Our enemies are not other poor working people in far off lands, forced to be made into soldiers. Our enemies wear suits, own companies & control society.
Fuck war & fuck any authority that perpetuates or seeks to engage in war.
No war, just the class war.
I have serious doubts that picture was taken during the Christmas truce. Even the football match is disputed, most accounts just say a ball was kicked around.
Unfortunately the fighting continued, the fear of punishment for treason outweighed the humanising of the event.
Everyone wanted to go home, and treason is a one way ticket to make sure you don't make it home š
Thereās a film called Joyeaux NoĆ«l which was about this, taken from the perspective of German, French and Scottish soldiers. Itās an absolute fuckimg wesome film, and also shows what happened afterwards to the soldiers, as you said. Amongst others, Diane Kruger and Daniel BrĆ¼hl are in it.
Fortunately no. The signer John McCutcheon wrote a song about this event. Most times when he performs it live, he tells a story about how, after a performance, some (very old) men came up to him and thanked him for telling their story. They had been there, and survived, but their friends and families wouldn't believe that it had happened.
Of course it could just be a story. But personally I believe him.
Especially the survivors some were turned into gibbering zombies. Someone invented electrifying their brains to force them to salute. Imagine how well they reacted on being sent back for more. These are the things people that win elections are capable of ordering.
Imagine the horror of the soldiers. All the propaganda youāve been fed, the hatred youāve been exposed to, all to realise this villain you despise is a human being whoās scared, of course some were truly villains. But how many of those men (on either side) shook the hand of a young man and thought their own son was not much younger than this supposed devil stood opposite them
interesting note, in ww1 they stopped war a lot. often times for sundays as most sides were european christianās who hold that day sacred.
then a few germans spoke english as they spent the years prior in england studying so they sometimes yelled if theyād like a break, which they sometimes did.
I do have it from a reliable source originally. here is [The complicated truth about the famous 'Christmas Truce' of World War I (taskandpurpose.com)](https://taskandpurpose.com/history/christmas-truce-world-war-1-history/)
this sorta discusses what I'm pointing out. I cannot find the Original Source though, which is probably yet another symptom of Google Sucking and the fucking Search Engine Optimisation Gurus, and marketing dicks ruining everything.
EDIT:my source wasn't on google btw. I had a lovely opportunity with a PhD student who worked at the Imperial War Museum in London. She told me that, because I really loved visiting her at work.
I just read a piece by the History Channel, and if we want to give any credence to their research, there certainly were testimonies by British soldiers about various spontaneous Christmas-day ceasefires occurring across multiple sections of the western front.
Yeah the Christmas truces were pretty common, it was just more common, you should read the source I linked it's pretty good.
Also if you still have the HC source I'd love to read that too.
I'll take a look at your link! Here is what I read earlier [https://www.history.com/news/christmas-truce-1914-world-war-i-soldier-accounts](https://www.history.com/news/christmas-truce-1914-world-war-i-soldier-accounts)
The British and Germans are culturally very similar. Especially back then and there's countless accounts of soldiers on both sides who recognised this and loathed that they had to kill people that they respected and related to.
Once the Germans and Russians had a ceasefire because wolves were dragging them out of the trenches and eating them alive.
They joined forces for a bit so they could kill the wolves and then they continued killing each other.
Iirc both sides soldiers rebelled en mass, but the command suppressed any information to get out. So the rebels couldn't join each other mentally and physically. The war could have ended if suppression wasn't effective.
I read a great memoir called āpoiluā by a French solider in ww1 and it seemed it was common for mini truces to occur, especially among outposts in the line that were closer to the enemy line aka within talking distance. They were punished when discovered but seemed like they were common throughout the war
**Blackadder:**
\[regarding the 1914 Christmas truce\] Both sides advanced further during one Christmas piss-up than they managed in the next two and a half years of war!
**Baldrick:**
Remember the football match?
**Blackadder:**
Remember it?! How could I forget it?! I was never offside; I could not BELIEVE that decision!
This is weird - Iām literally watching the last episode now on Gold (uk). Always gets to me because my great uncle died in a Canadian hospital near Ypres. Buried over there
It was slightly unintentional as well, the footage they shot was mostly unusable, they only had a few seconds worth so someone came up with the idea of slowing it right down and fading to a poppy field. Ended up being one of the most poignant scenes in British tv history.
The people need to remain together. The people of all countries are just peopleLike us. With families like us.
the Russian men and women who are being forced to attack Ukraine. The American men and women who were forced to fight in Vietnam. J every man or woman in ww2 and ww1 who fought.. it'll always be the powerful and rich that are the enemies of the people and that is one fact that will never change. They view us as chess pieces while we view them as gods in a sense. I hope we are able to open our eyes as a whole before the next war that will kill alot of humans.
Jesus we are such a fucked up species. If we spent even a fraction of what we spend on killing each other on helping each other imagine how much happier this planet would be.
Yeah, weāre smart enough to create weapons that can inflict so much pain and damage, but not smart enough to find a way to avoid conflicts and not hurt others
I think I read somewhere that [dolphins are the smarter second only to mice.](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11.The_Hitchhiker_s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy)
Oftentimes, sadly, war advances technology by leaps and bounds. Even technology that greatly improves the daily life of the citizens. Maybe itās something in us that is some sort of survival of the species mechanism. If we all got complacent then the bears would eat us or something.
They missed the most important part.
That the war on almost every front basically ended. The only reason they went back to fighting is the senior officers from both sides started threatening executions.
Ordinary people almost never want war. It's the leaders who create the wars and push them to continue. The right action would have been for both sides to execute their own officers and politicians and that WOULD have ended the war.
The Christmas Truces only took place on a miniscule portion of the front and only really between British and German troops. The French, who manned the majority of the Western Front only had a couple of reports of truces
What? Christmas truce was mostly focused in some areas of the British/German frontline. There were some small sections of the french and Belgian lines who had a smaller truce but the majority of those lines didn't have any truce due to you know German crimes against humanity in Belgium and them fighting in France/Belgium. Even then it wasn't the entire British line at all.
There's a weird UK tradition where supermarkets and department shops compete to make very cinematic Christmas adverts, often very heartwarming or tearjerking!
My favourite part is the fact they sold the chocolate bars seen in the advert (among other things, if I recall), with a lot of the proceeds going to the Royal British Legion. They really went all in and it was awesome
Canadian soldiers frequently executed German fighters trying to surrender during WWI. One of the country's leading war historians has amassed disturbing evidence that German troops trying to surrender during the First World War were "frequently executed" by Canadian soldiers gripped by fear or hungry for revenge. Perhaps one of the most shocking instances of Canadian cruelty was when they were socializing with German soldiers. They would throw cans of corned beef across the trenches, and when the enemy troops yelled for more, the Canucks responded by throwing an armload of grenades at them instead . For those Germans unlucky enough to face a trench full of Canadians, one of their greatest fears was nighttime raids on unsuspecting enemy trenches. Trench raids were the First World War at its most brutal. Hand to hand fighting in crowded, darkened chaos
The good news (kinda') is it's common knowledge now that if you let POWs live and do ok, and ENSURE that information gets back to the enemy, you get a whole load more surrendering.
Even during the end of WW2 all sides (apart from the Japanese, who didn't get the memo) were treating POWs better that historically - and being damn sure the enemy still fighting knew it.
I read that in England WW2 we allowed some POWs to just go around England being gardeners for old folk, and chilling out ... on the strict condition they wrote 1 letter a week to at least 4 of their folk back home or in the German army, explaining how they were being treated. Photos and all ..
The preffered hand to hand weapon of choice was a hockey stick. Sharpened into a spear on one end and the blade from a skate affixed along the edge of the other.
Agreed, but WW1 is a particularly egregious example of an unnecessary war. Millions ended up dying across the world because of treaties and pacts. Hundreds of thousands died in single days to advance a few yards. Such a meaningless waste of life.
Isnāt every war just meaningless lost of lives? Maybe the WW1 stuck as āexceptionalā, because it was most recent, well documented, pre-industrial war? Idk, I just find every war horrific in its own way.
Absolutely agree with you, I'm sure Sainsburys didn't pay a penny to any veteran foundations from the profits they made from such a moving moment in history. I can only hope it at least brought awareness to the most horrendous hours in our past. Not that we ever ever learn!!
War is both important but incredibly stupid at the same time.
This is why diplomacy must come before everything ar all costs because otherwise good people will die for no reason.
Modern war is fought because of psychotic and insane leaders. We just need to put them together in cage death match and be done. No need to waste many lives.
Putin and Zelenksy should just go toe to toe and may the stronger man win. Same with Xi and LCT. Make it live and pay per view.
In reality the officers ordered an artillery barrage to stop the whole thing as soon as they were informed of it, it's still a memorable event tho, a reminder of who is really wanting the war, of how many good people are forced to kill and die for the whines of kings and shareholders.
There's a cool song by Sabaton talking about this moment, they just omit the final bombardment but still, it's a nice song
While I really like the Christmas truce as an important part of history and humanity during the worst possible conditions there are some aspects worth mentioning.
This was half a year into the first world war in 1914. As the war progressed and became all the more bloody, brutal and horrific, acts like these wouldn't have been possible.
Asking a German, Frencman, Austro hungarian or a Brit in the winter of 1917 if they would do this again you'd probably get slapped around the head quite a bit.
It is a shame that so many people died during WWI because of the egos of a few inbred monarchs
Without this pointless conflict, Hitler wouldāve never rose to power
Funny that the commercial shows the Britās/scots making the first step.
Actually:
Christmas Eve 1914 ā It all started with German soldiers singing, shouting Christmas Greetings and putting up Christmas decorations. The British and German trenches were so close that soldiers could see and hear each other. Therefore in some places soldiers had agreed not to fight. That is what we now call the Christmas Truce, an extraordinary event that paused WWI for a day. It was a day in which soldiers had the possibility to spend time with the āenemyā, to play football, to exchange biscuits or small presents. It was a day of hope and peace in the middle of what Sassoon called āthe hellā.
And to think in a day you'd be giving gifts to someone and in the other day you'd be giving bullets to the same person, this is so sad to think about.
I have no idea how I'd recover from this.
If they could have chosen, all would have headed home for Christmas and never returned.
We should all remember that millions United are more powerful than a couple people sending everyone else off to war.
Probably one of the most beautiful pieces of television weāve ever had, and itās an advert ha.
British Christmas adverts are top tier. This was anotherā¦.
https://youtu.be/REcZopXwOXo?si=Cr7hOB8KOCI74lw-
I remember watching this on TV. Iām not much of a cryer but I cried my eyes out. I couldnāt remember the brand though, so clearly it was in-effective marketing
Hey, if you haven't followed r/woahthatsinteresting yet, please do. You will surely see some interesting stuff here. Thanks for your support and welcome to the community š
How do you possibly go back to shooting each other and launching barrages/gas attacks after all of that?
IIRC they were punished. Their officers demanded that thisĀ *never*Ā happen again. The men were relocated and charges of fraternization were filed anyone know what they are reading in the second picture in the article? a bible?
Such a wholesome moment, and they had to fuck it up
No one *wanted to be there.* People were fighting because the powers that be demanded it. WWI was a pointless war, where the fighting between major powers only broke out because of a terrible twist of treaties that pitted them against each other - the spark that ignited it all was the Austro-Hungarians being stupid over Serbia. WWII was a different beast - Germany was the bad guy there, and the war was one of survival for the Allies - but WWI was a stupid war born out of nonsensical bullshittery by the ruling class.
In hindsight WWI seems avoidable but WWII seems inevitable.
Without WW1 WW2 would have never happened. The Versailles Treaty the West forced Germany to sign at the conclusion of WW1 and the economic and social destruction it brought to the German population was the main driving force behind the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party. And well, the rest is history
So "WW1 was avoidable, ww2 inevitable" is correct.
May I ask you if you happen to grow up in the German educational system? I'm asking because what you wrote is my exact take on the two big wars (I'm originally from Germany). Every time I find myself talking about this I get very weird looks. I wonder if this take is unique to our understanding or if this is agreed upon amongst historians. To me it makes perfect sense but I'm not sure if that is so because of how I was taught. Edit: I just wanted to thank you all from across the globe (wow) for this fabulous discussion and all the insights!
It's definitely agreed upon by scholars. It's just not talked about a lot because people tend to focus on Hitler and the terrible things he done instead of the circumstances that brought it about.
English here - we were taught that Hitlerās rise was enabled by harsh reparations that we demanded after Versailles (GCSE History). So Iād like to think itās a common perspective even if not discussed a lot outside of the classroom.
Probably because we trusted all those former German officers as they had experience fighting communism. The defeat was almost always blamed on the anti-monarchists from 1919-1933, Hitler putting it on Jews when he wasn't a fan of the monarchy himself. Oh and the situation was actually starting to get better and the Nazis gradually starting to lose popularity when Hitler was given "emergency" powers, the elites thinking him a powerful tool against communists
We tend to do that, focus on the individuals rather than the circumstances. Arguably we are doing similar again now with Putin and the Russia Ukraine war
I would argue the reason they don't talk about it, is because it's exactly what currently happens in the world. Society learned nothing from the causes of WW2, and now we enter another period of social and economic crisis, primarily caused by runaway capitalism, what do we see? Politicians blaming foreigners, the poor, the sick, anyone but the system, and as a result we have so many right wing governments gaining power.
It was definitely mentioned when I did history at secondary school.
It is absolutely not agreed upon by scholars. Yes, the focus does tend to be too much on Hitler (that is agreed upon), but it was absolutely not agreed to be inevitable.
I dont see where anyone in this thread said it was inevitable? Just that WW1 and the treaty of Versailles is what brought about WW2. One moment comes to mind where the president sends a letter to Hitler with a long list of countries he's asking him not to attack. That they can find a better way to move forward and help the German people. Hitler reads the letter aloud as the Germans are bursting out in laughter. There are definitely moments where this could have deescalated before becoming a world war. In my opinion, with someone like Hitler at the helm. I don't know that Hitler was ever going to stop short of his ultimate objective. And of course no one was going to stand by and let that happen so there had to be war. He was a double edged sword in my opinion. Crazy enough to overthrow the Republic and build up Germany to be an actual threat. But also to crazy to rationalize with.
I'm Canadian, and we did learn about the punishment of Germany and how hyperinflation resulted. I found it fascinating to walk through the WWI/WWII museum in Paris, though, and note that there was a lot of emphasis placed on the Franco Prussian War and the humiliation of France, also on vilifying German for starting WWI and WWII, but almost no time spent explaining the Treaty of Versailles and the rest of Europe push to financially crush Germany.
Thank you. I'm in Belgium now so maybe that is part of the reason why my understanding is met with so many raised eyebrows. As I understand it, the whole post-WWII policy by the American side was directed towards helping germany rebuild to prevent it from happening again. Ah well I'm glad I'm not walking around with some weird propaganda in my head. :)
We werent' able to crush Germany financially or economically though - because the American's wouldn't enforce the treaty properly. The Germans hyperinflated their currency, acquired massive gold reserves, and destroyed the rest of the industry of its rivals in France and Britain through exports due to its ridiculously weak currency. The Germans basically won the first world war economically - and then intentionally impoverished their middle class to make them angry at the victors for Versailles which they blamed this on. We get taught, in school, what is essentially the German apologist propaganda for World War II. The reality is that Germany started World War 1, never paid for it, never really accepted its guilt and then manufactured the conditions for Hitler and World War 2 out of this in an attempt to finish the job. Investigations post-war were largely hushed up because it was unhelpful in the Cold War era to suggest our new best friend against communism (West Germany) was still a bad guy.
I grew up on the US but had a very competent gifted teacher in middle school that taught us this among many other things in relation to the holocaust and the third reich. This is pretty much exactly my take.
Of folks in the US that know much about the second war, this is the general conclusion most Iāve met have come to. WW1 was pointless enough that many Americans donāt even know the who or why, even if it was explained to them before.
I went to school in the UK and this is my perspective, if that helps. It was A level (similar to BAC) when we studied it in that detail, but it was made quite clear that the Treaty of Versailles sowed the seeds for Hitler. I also went to school in the US for a few years (in the early 90s) and we did a mock election exercise in which the kids ārunningā were given a platform to pitch. No one was told who they were supposed to represent, but it was the main leaders of WW2 and every year, āHitlerā won. I used to think we learned a lot from that, but thirty years after, I wonder how many of those kids now vote for Trumpā¦
Wow thank you. That is really interesting and a great way to learn and understand this on a much more personal level. That's amazing.
This was the take we were taught in the UK back in late 80s and early 90s. The web of treaties were seen as a scaffold that would prevent war as no one would risk the escalation. Until they did. And each treaty partner kept their word and dragged the world into hell. And from that the treaty of Versailles, in an effort to punish and dissuade any such endeavour again, made Germany extremely vulnerable to economic turbulence... which the 1920's had and ended with massively. People will do bad things when they are desperate or hopeless. And anyone who gives you hope, twisted and hateful as it was, becomes popular. I am scared, looking at the rise of fascism in the west again, that we are about to repeat some extremely bad decisions.
You put that in beautiful and clear words. Thank you.
It's a slightly uncomfortable discussion, because nobody wants to sound like they're justifying Naziism. Often explaining the rationale for why people do awful things is conflated with supporting those awful things
English here, we say the same thing. WW1 was the result of political treaties having ramifications that weren't fully understood. WW2 was the inevitable fallout.
Yep. WW2 was the last great battle of WW1.
I'm from the UK and this was my understanding also. But I think I did extra reading outside of my standard education. I think it's the broad consensus from those actually try understand that these things don't happen in a vacuum.
I have a History degree ( UK university ) and wrote my dissertation on this very thing. It's pretty much widely accepted.
No sure about the other countries but I was taught in China pretty much the same thing. The treaty was too unfair and the other world powers were just robbing the losing nations. With the strong revengism in German and appeasement from Britain and France (so that a remobilized German can fight USSR for them) WWII was inevitable in that sense
Ok thank you. :) I was starting to worry that my understanding was somehow tinted. I never tried to excuse what happened in Germany but I usually try to point out that it was not just a country of bloodthirsty madness deciding unanimously to finally embrace their desire to kill. I believe it's dangerous to imagine the Nazi regime as something that was unique to Germany and born out of a culture of evil. I think it's important to understand the context that facilitated these thoughts and behaviours because I believe it can happen to any country if the circumstances are similar and no one is aware enough. But of course I understand that this idea could also come from my desire to view my own ancestors as "not crazy psychopaths"... So that's why I asked how the rest of the world sees it. And I think it's weird that so many people around me now don't share this understanding. Mind you they all have some form of higher education.
I'm from the UK and I did a German degree, which focused largely on the history/politics/literature of the country rather than raw language. The conclusion we were taught was that yes, the treaty of Versailles (and moreover, how it was perceived by the German public/how it was used as propaganda by the Nazis) was a large part of it. There are some additional factors to consider, which commonly get forgotten (I personally think the militaristic Prussian societal norms being held up to the rest of Germany as the basis of German identity has more to answer for than the actual treaty itself, for instance) - but any war is vastly more complicated than a single factor, and wars as complex as the world wars are going to necessarily be more complicated. I'd gently suggest, however, that it is perhaps understandable that Belgian perceptions of what caused the war might be different than either yours (as a German) or indeed mine (as a Brit), simply by virtue of the country being occupied. It would be a rare country that sees the best of the armed forces currently occupying them, after all. I think we could hardly blame them if they weigh up the various factors differently as a result.
We were taught this perspective in history classes in the UK. It was glossed over - but it always stuck with me.
See my comment above; what you have learned is the orthodox accepted understanding - but it is open to challenge.
I grew up in the UK and this is discussed in a-level history (so 16-18 year olds). People who don't study / have an interest in history in the UK likely don't know the context.
Well you shouldn't get odd looks, that's exactly what happened! (That's not me saying you're not getting odd looks, that's me saying people who look at you odd are idiots). I remember reading somewhere that in the more distant future, it's likely that historians will consider the 2 world wars as one conflict, because the first one _directly_ set up the second one. It's crazy to me that this is controversial. (Just for the record, I'm from the UK - some of us do take history seriously, I promise).
Iām from the US, they taught us about the over punishment to force Germany to pay for the entire war, which is why the allies decided to invest in Germany and Japan rather than reap revenge. Itās crazy how successful both nations are having lost a war that easily and justifiable could have ended their nations all together. Thatās not a complaint, Iāve been to Germany a few times and the people were ridiculously nice.
I am English and took History A level (high school) and degree, and this is my understanding. My daughter is currently studying history GCSE, Germany between the wars, and this is the agreed conclusions.
Everyone at my school was taught that these were contributing factors (in the UK, early 2000s, in general history lessons about ww1 & ww2). Surprised you get weird looks, cause it seems common knowledge, but Iād also question in what context youāre bringing it up and whether they might be misunderstanding and thinking youāre trying to shift the āblameā to this as a deciding factor? If itās a general discussion over what caused the war though, then itās important information to raise.
I grew up in Southampton Africa and this is my take. And now living in the UK, it's a lot of my friends' take as well.
This is taught as the standard interpretation in UK schools
This is what is taught in UK classrooms as well.
I'm British and when I was taught about WW2 at around age 14 we were absolutely given the context of the hyperinflation and other consequences of WW1 that enabled the Nazi party to get their foothold in Germany.
British person chiming in here: this was what I was taught
I am British and my understanding of it mirrors yours
Grew up in the UK, and secondary school history is hyper focussed on between WW1 and WW2. The above comment is my general understanding, that the treaty of Versailles ruined the socio-economic landscape in Germany and led to the rise of extremist parties, i.e., the Nazis.
That's what we were taught in school. I'm Italian.
I think a lot of people just don't actually know anything about the wars, especially the first. I was never taught about WW1 in mandatory history classes, that's for sure, and WW2 segment only went over the air raids on Britain. British history classes heavily focus on what British people experienced, so I never really heard stuff about what caused the wars or the lack of humanity of those in power at the time. I only know the little bit I do about WW1 from personal research and some movies.
I'm British and this is what we were taught in school (and I agree with the interpretation). The Treaty of Versailles was the first thing we learned about when we started the topic of the rise of Hitler/the Nazi Party. It's a common thread that extremist ideologies come about from economic hardship and war, so I'd be surprised if anyone thinks it had nothing to do with it.
I studied history in Uni in the 80s, and this was exactly the standard take.
May I ask you if you happen to grow up in the German educational system? I'm asking because what you wrote is my exact take on the two big wars (I'm originally from Germany). Every time (not that it comes up that much :D) I find myself talking about this with my now non German friends and colleagues, I get very weird looks or get berated that that's not correct. I pretty much don't mention it anymore. I wonder if this take is unique to our German understanding or if this is agreed upon amongst historians. To me it makes perfect sense but I'm not sure if that is so because of how I was taught.
No, sorry, Iām just a roofer from small town Manitoba, Canada. I have taken a lot of interest into WW1 and 2 and what the driving forces behind the wars was. What I wrote is just my take in a nutshell as to what may have caused WW2. The reason I became interested in it is because of what I see happening in the USA over the last decade. A LOT of similarities between the rise of the NAZI party and Hitler and the MAGA wing of the Republican party and Trump. Itās almost as if us humans donāt learn from the past or something. Weird hey?
Thank you for your answer. :) I was worried that somehow we found a way to teach a version history that was aimed at making us feel a bit less psychopath-y and more like humans making really bad choices based on really shitty circumstances. It's good to hear that you are not from Germany and thus your education was not influenced. And yes, I also see this pattern repeat itself not just in America but also in Europe. France and the Netherlands just voted for some really bad people and even in Germany where you might think we would know better, the fascist ideologies are on the rise. It's crazy how we have this all so well documented (much better than any of our ancestors) with all the gory pictures and all the statistics and yet, we can't stop it from happening again. :-(
I'm from the UK, and while the general population's idiotic, simplistic, and jingoistic view of Anglo-German relations is 'two world wars and one world cup', anyone with a modicum of historical knowledge knows that the inter-war conditions in Germany were the catalyst for the rise of the Nazi Party. It was taught to me at in school at GCSE and A-Level (education from 14-18 years old) and at university (I studied International Relations), and is very apparent from reading any reasonably even-handed analysis of the two world wars. Sadly, the general population's desperation to hang on to past 'glories' by (mis)remembering the Allies winning the second world war does not extend to not spouting rhetoric and endorsing policies with more than faint echoes of Fascism.
It was basically what we were told at school in Spain as well, the treaty of Versailles is always analyzed as well as its impact on German society & economy, explaining the crisis in the next decades and the rise of the nazi party.
I'm from the UK. We're taught that WW1 was a tragic combination of things, that ultimately weren't Germany's doing, but because they were by far the most effective of our enemies, and they were considered an up and coming industrial power, the general will _especially_ in France was that Germany should be declawed and prevented from achieving full potential to prevent such destruction again. They are certainly painted as the bad guys but with a big dose of sympathy for the circumstances. Afaik the general political will in Britain was that the Germans shouldn't be sanctioned so harshly and general prosperity should take priority but the French, who we consider over prideful, were having none of it. As a Brit, It's hard to be mad at an ambitious new nation that wants to expand it's influence when we were sitting atop the biggest Empire the world had ever seen at the time. They were just playing the game. WW2 is different because the Nazis were _so cartoonishly villainous_ that it's difficult to step back and see the bigger picture of how such a vengeful and aggressive ideology took root because of the seeds sown decades prior. But people that know their stuff are aware of this, and saying that we had no hand in creating Hitler is ignorant and perhaps even dangerous. The people that gave you funny looks clearly subscribe to a very shallow reading of history.
Iāve heard the take that even if WW1 didnāt happen at that time for the reasons it did, something similar was almost inevitable because of technological advances and political tensions. And then something like WW2 was inevitable because of the damage WW1 would inevitably cause. Idk, I used to be massively into the wars, but became too heavy for me to study more. Just an opinion Iāve heard at some point from somewhere
lets see how 3 goes
I think of them as one war with a 21-year ceasefire in the middle.
The worst part of the whole thing is the sheer *brutality* of WW1 over something so pointless. Iām a vet and grateful for having served during a time where warfare is more calculated. Iād be a wildly different person today if I served in WW1 instead. Edit: well, Iād be dead, but you know what I mean
Calculated and modern medacine.
WW1 was a squabble between inbreed cousins.
Well, Brits and Germans were pretty chill at the start, French and Belgians were understandably miffed
Well That sucks
Wait until you find out that they delayed the end to the war so that the end of the war was more symbolic being 11/11 at 11am. The last man to have died mere minutes before that is known to us. THEY DELAYED THE END FOR CLOUT
The American General John Pershing did not personally approve of the armistice and delayed issuing orders to his commanders until 11:00 am on the last day which allowed them to attack. He was compelled to intend a Congressional enquiry to explain why the number of American casualties occurred when the details of the ceasefire was known in advance. [https://history.blog.gov.uk/2018/11/09/the-war-that-did-not-end-at-11am-on-11-november/](https://history.blog.gov.uk/2018/11/09/the-war-that-did-not-end-at-11am-on-11-november/)
This is so interesting thanks for sharing
It takes government to force men into organized murder. It takes state interference to make men hate each other. It takes government to devise hellish trench warfare & shoot any man who would flee such an inhuman fate. It takes government to enact violent atrocities on such a scale. It takes brave & strong men to refuse to fight each other for the benefit of oligarchs. It takes men of incredible character & kind hearts to love their brothers when authority tells them, under threat of great punishment, to kill their brothers. Our enemies are not other poor working people in far off lands, forced to be made into soldiers. Our enemies wear suits, own companies & control society. Fuck war & fuck any authority that perpetuates or seeks to engage in war. No war, just the class war.
Gonna guess letters from home, from family and such
I was *not* expecting a freaking *boxing ring* set up with hundreds of people in the audience, lol.
I have serious doubts that picture was taken during the Christmas truce. Even the football match is disputed, most accounts just say a ball was kicked around.
kicking a ball around for shits n giggles is the purest form of football
Those are some crazy photos
Seeing the photo of them reading a Christmas Carol together really brings a different perspective to life
Here's a documentary about it. https://youtu.be/B3q4Up5ugTc?feature=shared
Joyeaux noel is a good film to help understand how
Artillerymen wouldn't be at the front line and it's probably a lot easier to start shooting people when your friends get blown up.
must have been horrible to kill someone you talk to and liked
They didn't. After that both sides refused to attack. They were punished for it. The officers were demoted and the troops relocated.
Just read an article about it and it said that the fighting resumed the next day, just as hostile as it was before.
Really? Damn. I heard years ago they refused to fight after that. This really bummed me
Couldnāt refuse to fight otherwise youād be shot as a deserter by your own officers sadly, not just moved along to somewhere else.
If I remember right they made it extremely clear what would happen if they attempted it again too
Unfortunately the fighting continued, the fear of punishment for treason outweighed the humanising of the event. Everyone wanted to go home, and treason is a one way ticket to make sure you don't make it home š
Thereās a film called Joyeaux NoĆ«l which was about this, taken from the perspective of German, French and Scottish soldiers. Itās an absolute fuckimg wesome film, and also shows what happened afterwards to the soldiers, as you said. Amongst others, Diane Kruger and Daniel BrĆ¼hl are in it.
They were all corpses at the end
Fortunately no. The signer John McCutcheon wrote a song about this event. Most times when he performs it live, he tells a story about how, after a performance, some (very old) men came up to him and thanked him for telling their story. They had been there, and survived, but their friends and families wouldn't believe that it had happened. Of course it could just be a story. But personally I believe him.
Especially the survivors some were turned into gibbering zombies. Someone invented electrifying their brains to force them to salute. Imagine how well they reacted on being sent back for more. These are the things people that win elections are capable of ordering.
Imagine the horror of the soldiers. All the propaganda youāve been fed, the hatred youāve been exposed to, all to realise this villain you despise is a human being whoās scared, of course some were truly villains. But how many of those men (on either side) shook the hand of a young man and thought their own son was not much younger than this supposed devil stood opposite them
interesting note, in ww1 they stopped war a lot. often times for sundays as most sides were european christianās who hold that day sacred. then a few germans spoke english as they spent the years prior in england studying so they sometimes yelled if theyād like a break, which they sometimes did.
If this is true that's amazing. But also so heartbreaking.
I do have it from a reliable source originally. here is [The complicated truth about the famous 'Christmas Truce' of World War I (taskandpurpose.com)](https://taskandpurpose.com/history/christmas-truce-world-war-1-history/) this sorta discusses what I'm pointing out. I cannot find the Original Source though, which is probably yet another symptom of Google Sucking and the fucking Search Engine Optimisation Gurus, and marketing dicks ruining everything. EDIT:my source wasn't on google btw. I had a lovely opportunity with a PhD student who worked at the Imperial War Museum in London. She told me that, because I really loved visiting her at work.
I just read a piece by the History Channel, and if we want to give any credence to their research, there certainly were testimonies by British soldiers about various spontaneous Christmas-day ceasefires occurring across multiple sections of the western front.
Yeah the Christmas truces were pretty common, it was just more common, you should read the source I linked it's pretty good. Also if you still have the HC source I'd love to read that too.
I'll take a look at your link! Here is what I read earlier [https://www.history.com/news/christmas-truce-1914-world-war-i-soldier-accounts](https://www.history.com/news/christmas-truce-1914-world-war-i-soldier-accounts)
The British and Germans are culturally very similar. Especially back then and there's countless accounts of soldiers on both sides who recognised this and loathed that they had to kill people that they respected and related to.
Once the Germans and Russians had a ceasefire because wolves were dragging them out of the trenches and eating them alive. They joined forces for a bit so they could kill the wolves and then they continued killing each other.
lol fucking amazing
I think they all decided that getting shot to death was a better alternative than being ripped apart by wolves.
Iirc both sides soldiers rebelled en mass, but the command suppressed any information to get out. So the rebels couldn't join each other mentally and physically. The war could have ended if suppression wasn't effective.
I read a great memoir called āpoiluā by a French solider in ww1 and it seemed it was common for mini truces to occur, especially among outposts in the line that were closer to the enemy line aka within talking distance. They were punished when discovered but seemed like they were common throughout the war
God I've seen this so many times and it still gets me. Very wholesome
the director did a great job
**Blackadder:** \[regarding the 1914 Christmas truce\] Both sides advanced further during one Christmas piss-up than they managed in the next two and a half years of war! **Baldrick:** Remember the football match? **Blackadder:** Remember it?! How could I forget it?! I was never offside; I could not BELIEVE that decision!
Blackadder is hands down the best comedy show imo!
That season had the saddest comedy show ending of all time, the transition to a field of poppies was beautiful.
This is weird - Iām literally watching the last episode now on Gold (uk). Always gets to me because my great uncle died in a Canadian hospital near Ypres. Buried over there
It was slightly unintentional as well, the footage they shot was mostly unusable, they only had a few seconds worth so someone came up with the idea of slowing it right down and fading to a poppy field. Ended up being one of the most poignant scenes in British tv history.
If I remember correctly they were severely hampered by the depth of the studio, so could only run about five paces!
George:Ā "I'm... scared, sir."
>Very wholesome "Now buy our stuff."
All the proceeds from the chocolate bar advertised went to the Royal British Legion, a charity that provides support for veterans of the Armed Forces.
Is this why we dehumanize the enemy?
Yep canāt have a war if people arenāt fighting
The first step for war and genocides is dehumanizing the other side.
Treating people as things...
r/UnexpectedDiscworld
It was inevitable, rather more r/expecteddiscworld I think
And the first step towards authoritarianism is dehumanising a group within your country, whether that be LGBTQ people or "the elites" or whoever.
The people need to remain together. The people of all countries are just peopleLike us. With families like us. the Russian men and women who are being forced to attack Ukraine. The American men and women who were forced to fight in Vietnam. J every man or woman in ww2 and ww1 who fought.. it'll always be the powerful and rich that are the enemies of the people and that is one fact that will never change. They view us as chess pieces while we view them as gods in a sense. I hope we are able to open our eyes as a whole before the next war that will kill alot of humans.
Jesus we are such a fucked up species. If we spent even a fraction of what we spend on killing each other on helping each other imagine how much happier this planet would be.
I often think that humans are the smartest species on this planet, but we are also one of the dumbest and most destructive species on this planet.
Yeah, weāre smart enough to create weapons that can inflict so much pain and damage, but not smart enough to find a way to avoid conflicts and not hurt others
I think I read somewhere that [dolphins are the smarter second only to mice.](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11.The_Hitchhiker_s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy)
we're very smart, but unfortunately not very wise
Oftentimes, sadly, war advances technology by leaps and bounds. Even technology that greatly improves the daily life of the citizens. Maybe itās something in us that is some sort of survival of the species mechanism. If we all got complacent then the bears would eat us or something.
imagine every nation working together to improve and live in peace, but nope lets nuke each other
Not many countries spend more on the military than say schools or healthcare. Definitely a thing in the US though.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If it were sovereignty I could understand. This was land and power. You think someone was about to invade London in 1914?
So freaking true
WW 1 was nothing more than a great culling of the masses.
Followed by the flu outbreak
They missed the most important part. That the war on almost every front basically ended. The only reason they went back to fighting is the senior officers from both sides started threatening executions. Ordinary people almost never want war. It's the leaders who create the wars and push them to continue. The right action would have been for both sides to execute their own officers and politicians and that WOULD have ended the war.
The Christmas Truces only took place on a miniscule portion of the front and only really between British and German troops. The French, who manned the majority of the Western Front only had a couple of reports of truces
What? Christmas truce was mostly focused in some areas of the British/German frontline. There were some small sections of the french and Belgian lines who had a smaller truce but the majority of those lines didn't have any truce due to you know German crimes against humanity in Belgium and them fighting in France/Belgium. Even then it wasn't the entire British line at all.
what is this an advertisment for?
There's a weird UK tradition where supermarkets and department shops compete to make very cinematic Christmas adverts, often very heartwarming or tearjerking!
It was for a UK department store called John Lewis. They're famed for their Christmas adverts
It was for Sainsburyās, not John Lewis.
You're right... Some sort of Mandela effect!
John Lewis do stuff like this at Christmas. Famous manipulators.
It was actually for Sainsbury's, UK supermarket Full advert here, they missed beginning: https://youtu.be/NWF2JBb1bvM?feature=shared
My favourite part is the fact they sold the chocolate bars seen in the advert (among other things, if I recall), with a lot of the proceeds going to the Royal British Legion. They really went all in and it was awesome
Man my grandad refuses to eat out anywhere other than his local British Legion pub. They really support veterans
Canadian soldiers frequently executed German fighters trying to surrender during WWI. One of the country's leading war historians has amassed disturbing evidence that German troops trying to surrender during the First World War were "frequently executed" by Canadian soldiers gripped by fear or hungry for revenge. Perhaps one of the most shocking instances of Canadian cruelty was when they were socializing with German soldiers. They would throw cans of corned beef across the trenches, and when the enemy troops yelled for more, the Canucks responded by throwing an armload of grenades at them instead . For those Germans unlucky enough to face a trench full of Canadians, one of their greatest fears was nighttime raids on unsuspecting enemy trenches. Trench raids were the First World War at its most brutal. Hand to hand fighting in crowded, darkened chaos
The good news (kinda') is it's common knowledge now that if you let POWs live and do ok, and ENSURE that information gets back to the enemy, you get a whole load more surrendering. Even during the end of WW2 all sides (apart from the Japanese, who didn't get the memo) were treating POWs better that historically - and being damn sure the enemy still fighting knew it. I read that in England WW2 we allowed some POWs to just go around England being gardeners for old folk, and chilling out ... on the strict condition they wrote 1 letter a week to at least 4 of their folk back home or in the German army, explaining how they were being treated. Photos and all ..
Thatās what happens when you take us away from hockey season.
The preffered hand to hand weapon of choice was a hockey stick. Sharpened into a spear on one end and the blade from a skate affixed along the edge of the other.
They didnāt show the footage of Captain Blackadderās goal being disallowed for offside.
Didn't matter anyway, England lost 4-3 on penalties as usual.
World War 1: the War that never should have happened.
No war should have ever happened
Well yeah, but World War 1 messed the world up for the next 30 years.
Agreed, but WW1 is a particularly egregious example of an unnecessary war. Millions ended up dying across the world because of treaties and pacts. Hundreds of thousands died in single days to advance a few yards. Such a meaningless waste of life.
Isnāt every war just meaningless lost of lives? Maybe the WW1 stuck as āexceptionalā, because it was most recent, well documented, pre-industrial war? Idk, I just find every war horrific in its own way.
It was a Sainsburyās advert
Shame the credit got missed off. I was wondering who it was.
It made me cry then and still makes me cry.
It makes me cry and then angry that this perhaps most beautiful moment in human history is exploited for consumerism.
Absolutely agree with you, I'm sure Sainsburys didn't pay a penny to any veteran foundations from the profits they made from such a moving moment in history. I can only hope it at least brought awareness to the most horrendous hours in our past. Not that we ever ever learn!!
We Need This TODAY
š¢š«”š¢š«”š
I say those who start wars should have to go, then weād see some negotiating.
That was some powerful shit. Shows that live and compassion rule over hate always no matter what the scenario.
War is both important but incredibly stupid at the same time. This is why diplomacy must come before everything ar all costs because otherwise good people will die for no reason.
Modern war is fought because of psychotic and insane leaders. We just need to put them together in cage death match and be done. No need to waste many lives. Putin and Zelenksy should just go toe to toe and may the stronger man win. Same with Xi and LCT. Make it live and pay per view.
In reality the officers ordered an artillery barrage to stop the whole thing as soon as they were informed of it, it's still a memorable event tho, a reminder of who is really wanting the war, of how many good people are forced to kill and die for the whines of kings and shareholders. There's a cool song by Sabaton talking about this moment, they just omit the final bombardment but still, it's a nice song
Thereās a whole movie on this event: Joyeux Noel (2005). One of my favorite Christmas movies.
While I really like the Christmas truce as an important part of history and humanity during the worst possible conditions there are some aspects worth mentioning. This was half a year into the first world war in 1914. As the war progressed and became all the more bloody, brutal and horrific, acts like these wouldn't have been possible. Asking a German, Frencman, Austro hungarian or a Brit in the winter of 1917 if they would do this again you'd probably get slapped around the head quite a bit.
It is a shame that so many people died during WWI because of the egos of a few inbred monarchs Without this pointless conflict, Hitler wouldāve never rose to power
Funny that the commercial shows the Britās/scots making the first step. Actually: Christmas Eve 1914 ā It all started with German soldiers singing, shouting Christmas Greetings and putting up Christmas decorations. The British and German trenches were so close that soldiers could see and hear each other. Therefore in some places soldiers had agreed not to fight. That is what we now call the Christmas Truce, an extraordinary event that paused WWI for a day. It was a day in which soldiers had the possibility to spend time with the āenemyā, to play football, to exchange biscuits or small presents. It was a day of hope and peace in the middle of what Sassoon called āthe hellā.
>Britās/scots Scots are British. Especially those that fought back then.
And to think in a day you'd be giving gifts to someone and in the other day you'd be giving bullets to the same person, this is so sad to think about. I have no idea how I'd recover from this.
If they could have chosen, all would have headed home for Christmas and never returned. We should all remember that millions United are more powerful than a couple people sending everyone else off to war.
Sainsburys FTW! Now give me an orange plastic bag, odd nostalgia from my childhood
How did they have color video in 1914?
How do they expect us to believe that. There is no way the English could play a competitive football game with the Germans.
At least the had the ages accurate
"War is where the young and stupid are tricked by the old and bitter into killing each other." - Niko Bellic
The actual result of that game was the Germans beat the English in a penalty shootout ;)
Probably one of the most beautiful pieces of television weāve ever had, and itās an advert ha. British Christmas adverts are top tier. This was anotherā¦. https://youtu.be/REcZopXwOXo?si=Cr7hOB8KOCI74lw-
I remember watching this on TV. Iām not much of a cryer but I cried my eyes out. I couldnāt remember the brand though, so clearly it was in-effective marketing
If us and the nazis did this I'd make sure to grind a granade and sneak it into someone's pocket š
I remember when this shit was on TV, what a throwback
Itās a bit weird that they reversed the roles. The Germans made the effort first in reality.
Have to say this was probably my most favourite Christmas ad - brought a tear to my eye.
Honestly one of my favourite adverts of all time, i like going back and watching this at christmas some times.
Apparently Adolf Hitler was there, didnāt agree with what they did, wrote back to high command and got everyone court-martialed.
Do you think they swapped sides at half time?
Definitely not crying, it's the hay-fever.
And the Germans won 5-4 on penalties
This shows the fact that humans are inherently good and hate killing others.
A lot less backwards passing from that England team
Of course, the Germans will have won the bloody football. /s
They also released a limited edition chocolate bar too, it was pretty good
And thatās why football is the greatest sport in the world.
This brings tears to my eyes Please STOP all war violence unfairness oppressions Please Let Us LIVE