How is WWII remembered in your country?

[General Barron 0]

This is a pretty broad question, but I'm curious about how WWII is remembered in other countries/cultures, since I really only know the American perspective. I'm most interested in how the Germans deal with the subject (and Japanese + Italians, but I don't think there are many of them on these forums).

-----------

Specifically, I'd like to know things like: how is the subject taught in schools? How is it treated in entertainment media like books, movies, and video games? What is society's general feelings towards the subject (guilt-wise, pride-wise, etc)? What are your personal views on the subject? And perhaps the most touchy: what are the views of people you know (grandparents, etc) who were alive during that period? What do they think about their former enemy nations?

-------------

I'll give you my own brief answer. In the US, the general mood is that we, along with the other allied nations (specifically Britain and Russia; sorry Canada :P), essentially saved the world from Facist/Imperialist take-over. Perhaps that's a bit self-rightous, but mostly accurate. Most film (as I'm sure you know, since Hollywood reaches far beyond America's borders) basically echo this sentiment, although the focus is more on the bravery and heroism of the individual soldiers who fought the war.

Although a large amount of time in history classes is spent studying the Holocaust and crimes of the Nazis, interestingly enough, (at least in my experience) a huge amount of time and attention is spent critically studying American actions such as the internment of Japanese-Americans, racism/segregation within the military, and the firebombings/nukings of Japanese civillians. Japan seems to be largely ignored, or at least spared the scrutiny that the Germans get in terms of war-crimes. Italy is just a minor foot-note (I didn't even know they were involved with the Axis powers until I was in high school).

My grandfather flew patrols around the Aleuetian (sp?) islands in Alaska, although he thankfully never had to actually fight the Japanese. The weather was killer enough though, and he lost a few friends (and almost died himself) to weather-related accidents. Yet, as far as I can tell, he bears no animocity towards the Japanese or Germans today, at least the post-war generation.

Personally it is hard for me to imagine thinking of the Germans or Japanese as enemies. Japanese culture particularly has a huge influence on American culture, and I live in perhaps one of the most heavily Asian-influenced areas of the country.

However, the Japanese in particular seem to have never fully atoned for their actions. Every year, the Japanese prime minister visits a shrine that honors class A war criminals. There have been almost no repairations paid to even the living victims of the Imperial Army. I just finished reading "The Rape of Nanking", by Iris Chang, and the last part of the book describes how there has been a concerted effort in Japan to downplay their role in the war, and the attrocities they performed. Will the current generation of Japanese actually grow up to believe that they were actually the victims of WWII?

------------------

Anyway, sorry for writing a short novel, and sorry if this is a sensitive subject. But I'm curious, and in a reflective mood, so there.

[Jezz 0]

I seem to remember being told that the Yasakune Shrine in Tokyo is for all the japanese war dead, even from samurai times to modern day, not everyone there is a war criminal.

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Specifically, I'd like to know things like: how is the subject taught in schools? How is it treated in entertainment media like books, movies, and video games? What is society's general feelings towards the subject (guilt-wise, pride-wise, etc)? What are your personal views on the subject? And perhaps the most touchy: what are the views of people you know (grandparents, etc) who were alive during that period? What do they think about their former enemy nations?

I'd say it's taught in a rather neutral way. They don't go for the "evil jew-killing nazis" vs. "freedom loving" allies but instead opt for a more technical way to describe the whole thing. Of course our history lessons are more oriented towards the eastern front since it had much more relevance to the finnish history.

And as for the attitudes id say russians still get a lot of antipathy especially from older people. They took some territory back then. Germans (who were sort-of-but-not-really allied with us after winter war) are not viewed as negatively as in lot of other countries despite the fact we had to fight them in the end (northern finlanders probably have a bit more negative view on them as they burned villages while retreating).

[hellfish6 7]

I seem to remember in my (US) high school that we spent more time on the post-Civil War Reconstruction era than we did on WWI, WWII and the Cold War combined. This may have had something to do with the linear way we were taught - start at the beginning (English Colonialism) and finish at the end (Gulf War). I always hated that about history classes. Never enough time to learn about what I was most interested in. I still hate Civil War history to this day.

I think the US media and population at large has a sort of reverence for the WWII vets - certainly moreso than Korea and Vietnam vets, I think.

One thing I noticed in Europe is that they (especially the French) place a lot of importance on Armistice Day, which marked the end of WWI. You don't really get that in the US. Most people probably couldn't even tell you when WWI was fought or who the enemies were.

[Ironsight 1]

For the Netherlands:

4th of May: Death Remembrance Day

5th of May: Liberation day

Quote[/b] ]Specifically, I'd like to know things like: how is the subject taught in schools?

Pretty objective IMO. Think we get each side of the story from the bombings by Nazi's to bombings by Allied forces (especially on Dresden). We don't hear a lot about the war in the Pacific actually only about the situation in Indonesia (back then a Dutch colony.

In the media the subject is threated in the same way.

Quote[/b] ]What is society's general feelings towards the subject (guilt-wise, pride-wise, etc)?

Have no idea about that actually

Quote[/b] ]And perhaps the most touchy: what are the views of people you know (grandparents, etc) who were alive during that period?

One or both of my grandfathers had to work for the Nazi's to built a military airport in the area they lived in IIRC. Another story I remember are that they had to smuggle a lot of goods like into the country over the Belgium border. And there was a lot of AAA activity that kept them awake for nights.

However I don't think anyone in my family really badly suffered under th Nazi occupation.

Quote[/b] ]What do they think about their former enemy nations?

What's happened has happened. They hated the Nazi's not the Germans. I am actually quite suprised how good they were able to get allong with German people even shortly after the war

[da12thMonkey 1943]

The only thing I was taught about WW2 in school (in Britain) was the rise of the Nazi party in Germany, how they and Hitler came to power and the early events leading up to the "Final Solution"; Kristallnacht etc. There was a heavy emphasis on how the League of Nations was useless in acting against Germany breaking the terms of the treaty of Versailles etc, allowing them to wage a war in the fist place. My brother's currently doing a History A-Level that involves a module on Mussolini but I'm not sure what aspects of the war this covers.

So far as remembering the war goes, the BBC broadcast the Remembrance Day services (November 11th) every year. This year there's been a lot of stuff on TV about the 60th anniversary of VE day and 65th Anniversary of the Battle of Britain, quite a lot of new war memorials have been constructed too. Generally there's a lot of admiration for the people who survived the war and respect for the dead over here, but there are of course always the vandals and thieves within the youth (chavs) who seem to overlook this in pursuit of their own pleasure.

My grandad was in the Royal Artillery during the war. I never really heard him speak a great deal about his views on the war, he was pretty objective about it; just said where he went, what he did and what he thought of the people he fought alongside. He wasn't really fond of any other races or cultures (including English ones like Cockneys, Scousers, Geordies etc) regardless of what their involvement in the war was, so i can't say how much the war effected his view of other nations, but he wasn't particularly nationalistic either so I get the impression that he just saw it as his job as a soldier to be part of the war. It certainly didn't stop him traveling much of Europe with my grandmother after the war anyhow. My grandmother (who was in the RAF) speaks of the war along similar lines, but she also had some personal experience looking after enemy PoWs. She just saw them as people doing their jobs really, didn't hold much resentment towards them but since Shropshire wasn't greatly devastated by the war, it's unlikely she would have.

Our political relationship with our former enemies is alright I suppose, despite the general friction between our leaders within the realm of EU politics. Hence, some relationships are stronger than others: we seem to get on with Italy better than Germany politically. Relations with Japan are okay to the best of my knowledge but there's occasionally a call for them to be more apologetic towards their treatment of our PoWs.

Personally I'm very greatful of what the Allied forces did to prevent the invasion of my country, though I feel the part played by Britain in all this is vastly understated in mainstream media, and I feel it's a real pitty that the efforts of the ANZACs, Canadians, Indian forces and combatants from occupied nations are so frequently overlooked. I respect all sides for their suffering though I deeply resent the fact that fascism was allowed to become so dominant in European politics at the time. I also regret the inhumane actions conducted by most sides in the war. Though it was obviously done to a greater extent by some nations than others, I still feel there were a lot of incidents that resulted in an unecessary loss of innocent life.

[denoir 0]

Interesting topic.

Sweden as you perhaps know was neutral during WW2. Early in the war there were some pro-German tendencies, but that ended with the occupation of Norway and Denmark. After Norwegian Jewish refugees started fleeing to Sweden stories of atrocities started to emerge. Not long after we started actively covertly helping the allies.

One of the less 'proud' moments for Sweden was when we let the Germans transport iron ore from Sweden and to transport troops across Swedish territory into Norway and Finland. We didn't really have much choice in the matter though as Sweden was given an ultimatum to cooperate or be invaded. From a more pragmatic point of view (and this is I think the most widely held view by Swedes) is that by staying neutral, Sweden was a safe-haven for refugees fleeing the Nazis. A lot of lives were saved that way, and it certainly made a larger impact than had we entered the war (Sweden had no military to speak of). Covertly Sweden also provided a lot of intelligence on German infrastructure to the allies, as Swedish industrialists and engineers were allowed to freely move around in Germany. This information was quite useful for allied bombing raids.

So basically the common view here is that we did the best we could under the circumstances.

Quote[/b] ]Specifically, I'd like to know things like: how is the subject taught in schools?

I think that what is probably different from how the subject is taught in American schools is that allied war crimes are covered as well. While Americans are taught for instance that the atomic bombings of Japan was a necessity, here it is viewed as one of the worse war crimes of the war.

So altogether, I think that the view presented is more balanced.

Quote[/b] ]And perhaps the most touchy: what are the views of people you know (grandparents, etc) who were alive during that period?

My great grandfather worked in the Swedish embassy in Budapest during the war as a military attache. The embassy iteslf was under Raul Wallenberg involved with a scheme of providing Hungarian Jews with Swedish passports, to save them from the Nazis. My great grandfather was killed in early 1945 when the Red Army liberated the city - either by retreating German/Hungarian troops or by advancing Soviet troops - we don't know what happened.

In general, in Sweden there was fairly little direct resentment of the German people after the war. Sure, people were appalled by the Nazi war crimes, but still as Germany never actually hurt Sweden, hating them would be difficult.

[Harnu 0]

Here in Chicago, IL, USA, I can't say we do a whole lot of celbrating of the war. There's June 6 that's there's usually some stuff on for D-Day, but not entirely too much for VE and VJ day, except anniversary years. Maybe you can tell me I'm wrong Fishy, but I never really noticed too much celebration wise except for anniversary years on WWII.

The one place WWII is stressed and taught like crazy is in school. IMO (And no disrespect to vets) but it's too emphasized in schooling. From 1st-8th grade you learn the same shit over and over again (and this goes for all subjects). But it's always the same.

American history would always start with a long assed unit on Christopher Columbus and and the origins of the US. Then we'd move to the 13 colonies and spend a little while on that, then we'd take a few weeks on the Revolutionary War. After that, they would whisper the names of the French and Indian War, and the War of 1812, and then BAM! We're at the Civil War! A unit on that, and after a whisper about WWI. (Literally all I knew about WWI until learning more about it myself and in high school, was there were Machine Guns, and Mustard Gas, and the Germans were bad.) After this there was the unit sized section about the Great Depression. And then we kick off the oh too long WWII units.

For eight years, this is how they taught it:

Great Depression -> Japs bomb Pearl Harbor -> A couple ships sink in the Atlantic -> D-Day -> Overview on the war in Europe (Always taught America is the best and baddest mofos in the place) -> Hitler drops dead -> U.S. nukes Hiroshima + Nagasaki -> WE WIN THE WAR! (With little mention of allies). And somehow, that process engulfed over an entire quarter of history education each year.

Once we got to high school we fianally got a little more in depth, I took some more advanced history courses and we got to cover more things, and less of the normal stuff. But we never, ever, in any history class, ever made it past World War II. We never learned about Korea, and only in one history class did we ever mention Vietnam. (I wrote more about the history of Veitnam in my English classes than I ever did in a history class)

Well enough of this rant on the downsides of public education

[kakagoegie 0]

Well the Netherlands were occupied by the Germans most of the war. There was a lot of resistance against the Nazi's. But there were also large numbers of Dutchmen who chose to fight for the Germans. The South of the Netherlands were liberated during Operation Market Garden, but there the front stabilized. In the spring of 1945 the Allied forces liberated the East of the Netherlands but the West was still occupied when peace was signed.

Quote[/b] ]Specifically, I'd like to know things like: how is the subject taught in schools?

We didn't spoke much about it on school. We only had some classes on primary school about WWII. And as Ironsight said, we hear both sides of the story.

Quote[/b] ]What is society's general feelings towards the subject (guilt-wise, pride-wise, etc)?

Dunno, but sometimes there is shame about the Nazi supporters in the Netherlands.

Quote[/b] ]And perhaps the most touchy: what are the views of people you know (grandparents, etc) who were alive during that period?

Well my grandparents were all simple farmers or even children. So they didn't do any fancy in the war. They kept working on their parents (my grand-grandparents) farms. The men only had to hide sometimes when the Germans were having a razzia for men who had to work in Germany, but they never found them. After Marked Garden the region were they lived was in the front line for a few months. So there were some shellings and bombardments on top of their villages sometimes. And of course there was the AAA fire.

My grandmother one told me that she was riding her bicycle when and allied airplane was shot down near het position. Some people tried to free the pilot who was still alive inside the crashed airplane but it went up in flames and the pilot burned alive in front of her eyes.

My other grandmother told me that she was in a shelling from the Allies. She told me she saw a German with no head and a German with his guts hanging out. She told me that she could see that the soldier had eaten beans as breakfast. Well I think those are the things you remember when you're in the middle of a war.

But those things only happened at the end of the war. My grandparents were living their normal lives most time of the war.

Quote[/b] ]What do they think about their former enemy nations?

Well they lived very close to the German border and had a lot of contacts with Germans. So they only blame the Nazi's and think the Germans are a good people.

[harley 3 1185 0]

The British "A2" Course which I studied in the dim and distant past focused on the "Second World War in Europe", yet managed to be rather vague on the subject. My teacher attempted to teach us how important the Soviet Union and the U.S.A. were to the outcome of the war against the Germans and Italians.

Nevertheless, Britain's role (aside from acting as large depot for the Invasion of Europe, timewasters in Mediterranean and Battle of Britain) was severely downplayed; in no way were the strategies of Britain and her Empire discussed, nor the failure to mount an effective defense in May, 1940 against "Case Yellow" studied. For some reason, at the same time that we were being taught how America was the decisive factor in the war (and I mean no disrespect to any Americans by this, as I understand how reluctant the majority was to goto war before Pearl Harbour, and how America has been burdened with the role of Superpower ever since), we were never given any real context of the war in General. Therefore, I got a map of Europe/Russia, then drew on the various front lines for the Russians, British and Americans, and the results were sobering to say the least (America having made the Smallest Gains in the ETO, even though she had more troops present than in the Pacific Theatre).

As far as feelings go, still rough, whether that makes any sense. The Third Reich was meant to last "1000 years", yet resulted in the greatest butchery in history. My paternal Grandfather was an Artillery Officer in the Middle East then Italy as an Anti-Aircraft Officer (not exactly the nicest job in the world), whilst his brother-in-law was a Marconi Officer attatched to the Merchant Navy (The Radio Company provided the Wireless Operators). He had the horrendous misfortune of being torpedoed THREE times, the last time escaping through a porthole as the water came through the door of his cabin. After that he never put-to-sea again, and was rather different for the rest of his life.

I find it interesting that the Dutch are relatively forgiving towards the Germans, for I have seen the findings of a Royal Commission in 1946 which studied the results of "Organised Starvation" by the Germans, and the results were not nice. Then there were the large number (several thousand) of Dutchmen captured in the N.E.I. who were put to work on the Death Railway of Burma by the Japanese. I know that there are still many British veterans of the Far East war who are still extremely bitter about the part played by japan during the war, and I've met several American veterans of Gualdalcanal and Okinawa who feel the same way.

For those who wonder why in France, for example, turn-out is so much more on 11th November, you must realise that France literally "bled-white" by the Germans in WW1. At Verdun alone the French Army lost nearly 1 million troops for a stretch of ground measured in 1000s of yards. Her armies were broken by the failure of the Nivelle Offensive the following year and the ruinous Mutinies in its wake. That Britain then had to carry the burden is shown by the fact that she still remembers Armistice Day so reverently. Compared to WW2, the Great War was fought for little more than National Honour. The Second ended up with the total annihilation of "Hitlerism" as the Russians call it, and all the horrendous evils connected with it. It is rather downplayed over here for any number of reasons, one of which is how debilitated we were afterward, how miserably we performed overall, and the ensuing loss of Empire and the blame for everything which followed. The story of World War 2 is not the prettiest, for sure.

[scars09 9]

Interesting Question. Lets start with the "funny" stuff.

Quote[/b] ] How is it treated in entertainment media like books, movies, and video games?

The swatiska is forbidden by law wich results in censoring measures , for example Castle Wolfenstein, in german Version are no nazis, its all about a scientific group doing mutations and stuff. This sounds funny but it resulted in a delay from over half year and it wasnt playable in mp games. All other WW2 related games are censored aswell, that means flagstextures, uniformparts are retextured for the german market.

There arent much german war movies, the 1st international success was "the boat", wich doesnt reflect any political statement (except that they didnt like the nsdap party guy on board).

Quote[/b] ]how is the subject taught in schools?

Hard to answer, fact is that nearly every german pupil was in a concentration camp, at least once often more, so the Holocaust is the main focus on the WW2 topic. Personally i didnt get any other ww2 related informations from school except the holocaust. This could be different for anyone else, depending in wich sector he grew up. Famous german soldiers, that have a international reputation for their skills as soldiers not as murderes, i first saw when i started making ww2 missions for ofp. How exactly the 2nd World War was fought, like specific battles or about the Afrikakorps or single campaigns you dont get teached in school, and i had history as one of my main classes and had the longest possible schooltime in germany (even a little longer lol).

Quote[/b] ]What is society's general feelings towards the subject (guilt-wise, pride-wise, etc)?

We get reminded regulary that we have to feel guilty. First time someone was nice enough to call me nazi was on a vacation with my parents, i maybe was 10 years old. The one heard me talking german and started to call me nazi and stuff (an adult not a kid). Other story from my teenager days were i met a scandinavian beauty and after the first few sentences she asked where i from (met her in london) and i said germany (do you know that they tell us germans to say we from austria when we travel to great britain, funny lol). The next question from her was how many jews my grandfather has killed. I said none, his rank was to high, left her with open mouth and had a nice evening with a (i think) scottish girl that gave a shit about my grandfather.

I think its a generation thing, f.e. a high german politician visited isreal while ago, he was allowed to speak in the knesset (its written wrong i guess) and stand there with tears in his eyes and told them that the germans are guilty on what happend. I dont know the exact percentage but i think its between 30-50% of the knesset members dont came do his spoke cause they didnt want to hear the language they have so many bad memories off(if you survived that it is more then understandable). Then they interviewed some people in a Israel Cafe and asked a guy in my age (around 30) what he think about all this, and this guy could have been me, he had the same thoughts about it that it shouldnt be forgotten but that doesnt mean that you keep it in mind like it was yesterday. Its really a generation thing.

Quote[/b] ]What are your personal views on the subject?

I learned to respect the small soldiers that fought, no matter wich side they belong to. Most of them were recruited and had to do their job, same for my grandpa like for da12thMonkeys grandpa. They had no choice, there was no, hmm i dont feel to good today, i stay at home. And the most of the german soldiers were brave men doing their jobs, both my grandpas were no nsdap members, were recruited during the war (41/42) and had to do their job. One Kriegsmarine, one Luftwaffe, Kriegsmarine grandpa never saw action, Luftwaffe grandpa got shot down as a BF110 Radioman/Backgunner over the channel and got fished out by collegues of the kriegsmarine grandpa. No heroics, no iron crosses but both alive, nothing to feel guilty for.

What i am ashamed off is the holocaust, were innocent people, germans of other religion or ideology in the beginning,later the millions from other nations were killed in perfectly managed factories. Thats typical german, the way they organized it, all archieved correctly and in time. Hitler used the german attributes to kill millions and they did without spending a thought cause it was ordered. So it isnt totally wrong to remind us of that from time to time, cause we still have those attributes of doing things like ordered.

Quote[/b] ]what are the views of people you know (grandparents, etc) who were alive during that period? What do they think about their former enemy nations?

Kriegsmarinegrandpa was in Norway, still love the country and when he starts to tell me about its more like a excursion threw flora and fauna norways. He didnt saw action there so he had some time to travel norway and he love the country and nearly stayed there after war, but he couldnt get his wife and kid in so he got back to germany. He has no bad blood against any nation

or religion as far i know.

Same with Luftwaffegrandpa, nice guy, liked the pretty things in live, and was happy that he survived it without any damage. No bad blood against anyone as far i spoke with him.

A Father from a friend of mine was in yugoslawia and really hates the partisans fighting there, at end of war he walked home from there with a mate. He has legs like a "O", no wonder.

A Grandpa of a friend of mine were at the russian front and he had some real tough stories. And till today the sentence "the russians are coming" is present in our language, i guess when you say that sentence in a clinic for elder people you get at least one heart attack. So the russians are in some parts still feared/hated. What is unusual is that no one i talked to of the elder generation has or had anything against jews. I was told that they were totally integrated and in most cases it was impossible to say if someone is jewish or not.

Hope that helped you Gen. Barron

[Radnik 18]

... ah WWII

constant conflict between national heroes -Partizani- (Partizans) known as within communist movement, with mr.Tito as result, the first president of Yugoslavia since 1944 till 1980

and national enemy -Cetnici- (Chetnics) with mr. Draza Mihajlovic on head ... known as true slaughterers of innocent children and womans ... which is totaly wrong imo. !

anyway ... these two fractions was most popular among Yugoslavian resistance, Partisans where from all Yug. states, whilst Chetnics where from Serbia,

there were Croatian -Ustase- (Ustashe) movement but they fought against Serbs with Germany as friends while Chetnics fought against Croatians, Partizans and Germans ...

ring any bells !? ...

now ... there are a lot of contradictoriness about Chetnics, since they were presented in all elementary school books in 80`s as bad guyz and Partisans as a good guyz ... but that`s a long unfinished story so i wont write about it anymore.

p.s. Yugoslavia is one of the top country with most civilians died/killed in WWII.

[crashdome 1]

Well, I can't say much more about the American view than said, but in my early school days there was alot of extreme bias towards WWII and the pedestal we put ourselves on.. however, I do think this is more relational to the Cold War rather than WWII. I've seen school books lately and they are far better than what I remember... and I went to a private school up until high school. Those private schools back then very very biased. It promoted community around their ideology which is why I think we had such a skewed view of WWII from 1950's to the 1980's... it was actually in retaliation towards communism and the former Soviet Union more than anything IMO. Had there been no Cold War.. I truly believe we would have been less arrogant about the topics through those 3 decades.

I am not a history 'buff' but I enjoy it and had the pleasure of taking a few college courses about not only WWII but also Vietnam. I must say I came out of those classes with a much wider 'global' perspective of both wars. I truly thank my teachers for that. Much better than any high school course.. even 'Advanced' ones.

In the college level WWII course, we did discuss the efforts of everyone in the war. Some less talked about than others, but this was only a semester-long course. It was emphasized and summarized that Germany wasn't 'Evil' and that the nature of the situation up to 1939 could have provoked almost any nation into some sort of extreme and it just so happened someone decided to take advantage of it .. i.e. Hitler and his fellows. I guess it's kinda like saying when the moon is about so high and the clouds at this angle and the stars aligned so.. you can see the shape of a horse..or something like that. As for dsicussing the allies, it was all economics, awakenings of the US, the will of the rest of Europe (and other parts of the world), and 'combined' strategy.  Since this course only covered WWII in Europe, we did not discuss the Pacific War other than to draw correlations for economic purposes. If I could find the second half of this course (Pacific War) fits in my schedule I would have taken it, but I havent yet.

Most college level History classes I have taken have us read books authored by representatives of all sides of a conflict and we must analyze as if we were them. It is very refreshing, touching, and awakening all at once. As for high school or earlier... I might as well just consider that as simply mentioning the topic because it is all garbage to me now.

*EDIT* I failed to mention that the course I mention above was teken very recently and I think represents a significant change in the view of that time period away from traditional American teachings. The arrogance of the American past will definately take a few generations to weed out, but it will get there I believe.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

In New Zealand the two world wars are remembered as significant events in our history, although World War I and the 'ANZAC' experience does seem to dominate a bit in terms of what is remembered and celebrated over WWII, even though more New Zealanders fought in WWII (more died in WWI however). Our major celebration of wars past is Anzac Day on April 25th every year, which marks the day that New Zealand soldiers of the Australia New Zealand Army Corp landed at Gallipoli, Turkey on April 25th 1915. Not only is this event celebrated, but all wars including WWII, Korea, Malaya, Vietnam, and recent as well as ongoing 'peacekeeping' operations. It is a public holiday and many people buy and wear poppies to mark the occasion and to support the Returned Serviceman's Association. Armistice Day is celebrated, but not really by the wider public.

Our involvement in WWII is generally perceived to be a righteous one, leaving our shores to help defend the free world against facist tyranny, and at the time it was seen as protecting the British motherland. Veterans are given a high level of respect, and there are memorials in nearly every town no matter how small to remember those who died overseas.

Unfortunately an ignorance seems to be creeping over the country, especially amongst my generation (the young one). Many youths couldn't tell you much about WWII, and the education system does not help this. At lower levels of schooling the WWI Gallipoli campaign is taught, and is thought by many to be a sign of the emerging New Zealand identity, separate from that of Great Britain. Time is also given at the age of around 14-15 to Hitler's Germany and what it did and why WWII occurred. However, at no point is WWII as a whole looked at. I am doing history through senior school which is not compulsory, and whilst we did an entire topic on the origins and outbreak of WWII, looking at it from a broad perspective, we get no closer than that. The knowledge of the war I have learnt has mainly come through my own research and occasional television documentaries. Significant anniversaries such as the 60th anniversary of the Battle of Monte Cassino do get coverage, but that is the only real time WWII is seen in the media.

I just hope that people will become more aware of past events and WWII won't just become a name and something that involves American soldiers fighting evil Nazis in movies.

I had quite a few relatives who fought in WWII, but most are now dead or don't like talking about it.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Quote[/b] ]I think that what is probably different from how the subject is taught in American schools is that allied war crimes are covered as well. While Americans are taught for instance that the atomic bombings of Japan was a necessity, here it is viewed as one of the worse war crimes of the war.

Honestly I ask you, do you jest? Are you just making that up? Where did you get that? Have you seen a US textbook?

When I was in school we were always taught that we were the second most evil nation in world war two because of the nukes and the Japanese Americans being put in internment camps. I had one teacher in the eighth grade that taught other wise. He basically had the class debate the bomb and we were to all write a paper on how we felt about it and how we came to our conclusions.

I can't speak for all of Americans because many schools have different curriculums and textbooks. That said the schools I went to ignored world war two completely with the exception of the Eighth grade teacher I already mentioned. In High school our history textbook seriously only had two pages on world war two, I'm not exaggerating either. For the high school section on world war two we watched Schindlers list and called it a day. Personally I was appalled even then as I have studied world war two probably second only to Harley (when I was young my dad had hundreds of books on world war two that I would read, and I always watched PBS with him, Yeah I’m a nerd). Regardless of feelings on the issue world war two is one of if not the defining moment of the twentieth century.

For the most part the history in my school focused on the civil war (just slavery and Lincoln’s assassination), and reconstruction afterwards. There was also lots on the industrial revolution and civil rights in the 50’s but that’s about it. We would get taught that curriculum over and over year after year.

As for how do people here view the war? Usually with complete ignorance. Ask an American about the war and he’ll likely reply, “Oh yeah we won the whole war single handedly, we saved Europe!†and then “but it was all for naught because we bombed Hiroshima so in the end we were just as evil as the nazisâ€. Tell them about Nagasaki and they’ll flip, “you mean we dropped two nukes!?†Tell them about the Russians (or any other nation) “They were in it to? Well we saved their ass at Normandy!†It’s pathetic really. From my experience most my countrymen cannot even name the correct decade world war two was even fought in.

There is usually a stigma attached to knowing things like history, science, math and how to read in the united states. More importance is stressed on real important issues like, who is Paris Hilton schnooking this week, and anything concerning Jennifer Aniston and Angelina Jolie. But that’s for another thread.

[The Frenchman 0]

Quote[/b] ] how is the subject taught in schools?

In New York schools, they push the idea that doing nothing lets bad things happen. We spend alot of time talking about the events leading up to WWII and our teacher placed alot of emphasis on how it was better for Hitler to not be assassinated before the battle in Berlin, as there was a possibility of him being replaced by a very much more battle experienced general, making the war last even longer.

In the class I am in now,(Advanced Placement US History), we spend only 2 weeks on a unit, which means all the boring Columbus stuff is over within a week. When we are doing the American Revolution, the regular classes are just starting with the early explorers.

Quote[/b] ] How is it treated in entertainment media like books, movies, and video games?

Generally, WW2 is represented here like anywhere else in the US.

Quote[/b] ] What is society's general feelings towards the subject (guilt-wise, pride-wise, etc)?

Average "w3 saved teh wurld!1" kind of attitude. We understand that the Japanese interment camps were wrong, but those times were desperate and paranoid.

Quote[/b] ]What are your personal views on the subject?

I personally believe too much guilt and shame has been put on Germany, who is just as guilty or even less guilty as Japan in some respects.

Quote[/b] ]And perhaps the most touchy: what are the views of people you know (grandparents, etc) who were alive during that period? What do they think about their former enemy nations?

My grandfather was in the Coast Guard and stationed at Fort Niagara, where he met my grandmother, of German decent.

After the war, he had the funnest job in the world; dragging out bloated corpses out from the Niagara River who had jumped over Niagara Falls to commit suicide.

"After a few days, you don't pull them out by the arm. Their skin falls off like a rotten apple that way." he would tell me.  

[shinRaiden 0]

PM Koizumi's reasons for his visits to YasuNoKuni are rather unknown as he refuses to discuss it at any length. He did however bow to diplomatic pressure this year and did not visit it on the 60th anniversary of the WW2 Surrender.

YasuNoKuni however is not a WW2 memorial. While there are Class-A's memorialized or interred there, YasuNoKuni was originally established in the late 1800's to memorialize those that died in defense of the Empire during the Meiji Reconstruction and democratization, the following civil war, the Russo-Japanese war, and the Manchurian occupation, all prior to post-1941 aggression against the Allies.

It's essentially their version of Arlington National Cemetary, and for all the bad mouthing YasuNoKuni gets, I'm cynically not suprised that there's not a equal call for the closure of Arlington National Cemetary due to the Indian, Mexican, or Spanish-American wars which are roundly critiziced by the same crowds as racist imperialism, or the Civil War battlefield graveyards where Yankees and Confederates are buried together.

Furthermore, complaints about PM Koizumi visiting YasuNoKuni only pop up when China is under some sort of diplomatic or economic pressure, tainting their allegations of impropriety. On the other hand, PM Koizumi's run a rather unusual administration, shoving Japan into a leading role in East Asian politics re the DPRK, dismantling of nationalized institutions such as the Post Office Bank, unraveling of the Anti-Expeditionary constitutional clauses by sending JSDF elements to Iraq, in addition to unusual habit of frequently and privately visiting YasuNoKuni.

That said, from my limited experience they don't talk about that period of history much. Like most other countries, those that were adults during the war are rapidly dying off. That leaves those that were young children. All they know / remember is the effects of the destruction, and seeing many of their generation from Hiroshima and Nagasaki die of radiation diseases, as well as the massive primeval conditions and starvation. That was their "Great Depression" and as a cultural shame they only looked forward.

The result is that the third and fourth generations know little or nothing about Japan's role in the War. As an American, Imho that's the way to go. If our grandfathers chose to fight, that's their business not ours. The result that we have now is a nation that doesn't want to go to war, and is very supportive of peace efforts. That in of itself is a far greater reward than any apology or reparations possible.

Now there are grand internet conspiracies about Sony being an evil front corporation bent on global domination. They say that about Halliburton or other companies too. But seriously, I think that their situation, and perhaps not so much the silence of denial, but the silence of shame, has brought that chapter to a close and allowed a new generation to rise in innocence of their fathers misdeeds.

-edit-

On the other hand, Anti-Foreigner sentiments in Japan, and the far worse anti-semitic attitudes in the west were not seriously cracked until the issue was forced. The heavy occupation administration in Japan imposed sufficent alien presence to partially break the tradtional isolation, so while the culture internally remains isolated, externally they do reach out more to others. Anti-semitic sentiments in the west have similarly required, and continue to require draconian measures to combat due to the dispersed nature of the Jewish population.

[EiZei 0]

In the class I am in now,(Advanced Placement US History), we spend only 2 weeks on a unit, which means all the boring Columbus stuff is over within a week. When we are doing the American Revolution, the regular classes are just starting with the early explorers.

Going little off-topic here but does'nt the US history curriculum include anything prior to the 18th century?

[hellfish6 7]

Not US history classes - at least I was never taught about the indians beyond the fact that they were at Thanksgiving and wiped out over the two hundred years after Thanksgiving.

[crashdome 1]

Going little off-topic here but does'nt the US history curriculum include anything prior to the 18th century?

Well then, it wouldn't be US history now would it?

[EiZei 0]

Going little off-topic here but does'nt the US history curriculum include anything prior to the 18th century?

Well then, it wouldn't be US history now would it?

Well.. those colonist weren't created by god were they?

[hellfish6 7]

Going little off-topic here but does'nt the US history curriculum include anything prior to the 18th century?

Well then, it wouldn't be US history now would it?

Well.. those colonist weren't created by god were they?

Only people in Kansas, where they outlawed teaching evolution in favor of creationism, believe that.

[The Frenchman 0]

In the class I am in now,(Advanced Placement US History), we spend only 2 weeks on a unit, which means all the boring Columbus stuff is over within a week. When we are doing the American Revolution, the regular classes are just starting with the early explorers.

Going little off-topic here but does'nt the US history curriculum include anything prior to the 18th century?

World History(including meso-american civilizations) from the begining to Tokugawa Japan is in a class called Global History I.

World History starting from European absolutism to late 1990's goes in Global History II.

Stuff like Jose Marti and Simon Bolviar were covered here.

A.P.U.S.H. and US History Regents focus on North American history. We cover alot more ground than the US Regents classes due to being an accelerated class and reading a chapter every couple days at home instead of spending a week on a chapter.

Sorry for ot.  

[Airbourne Alchaholic 0]

I'm from Britain and...

...I was taught about all sides from the War, including the build up with Hitler's rise to power. We had to learn why the German people were so willing to have him as a leader, which was that he got Germany back on his feet, but only to dash it down a few years later with his inhumane way of "dealing with things."

Of course the holocaust is a primary topic, I don't think a single school in Europe donsen't involve it in its curriculum, which is a good thing.

Anyway, my awnser:

After doing the WW2 coursework I had the impression that Britain went in to help out Poland and Western Europe, only to be driven out be the Nazi War Machine. Then after a few years of waiting and getting bombed, America joined the war (I was never sure when Canada joined in, they didn't really talk about it, and don't blame me!. During this time, Russia was keeping Germany busy and distracted in the East, after thier victory at Stanlingrad (and the Seige of Leningrad). Because of this I think Russia contributed more to the War effort, the Western part of the Alliance mainly helped deliver the killing blow in my opinion.

My opinion of Britain in the war is that they managed to prevent total Nazi control in Western Europe, providing a foothold for a future invasion by British, American and Canadian forces, somthing that without, possibly the war would've dragged on longer, allowing the production of the first mass produced Jet plane, somthing the Russians wouldn't of stood a chance against. Also it was known that Germany was building an Atom Bomb at the time too.

POSSIBLY: Towards the future, Russia, if they suceeded, would've conquered Germany, France, Spain, and the domino effect could've affected Britain too. I'm not suggesting that Britain prevented the total spread of Communism, but they definatelly contributed to that goal.

I could go on and on, but I won't

[Jinef 2]

My view on this is decidedly left wing I think.

The Stats

The people who had the most casualties in order:

Russia - 20,000,000

China - Estimated to be up to 15,000,000

Slavic People - 6,500,000

Jewish People - 6,000,000

Germany - 4,500,000

Japan - 2,000,000 casualties.

UK - 620,000

France - 500,000 casualties 1/2 civilians.

Italy - 500,000 casualties.

Hungary - 400,000

Poland - 400,000

Romania - 400,000

US - 300,000

In the raw number of dead you can see how an advanced media with such undisputed coverage gives horribly distorting ideas when laced with nationalistic bias. Also the nationalistic bias was quite present in my education in the UK, despite trying to be objective.

Some observations on the war

In all theatres of conflicts civilians were abused and used to support country's armies. The toll on these people is mostly uncounted.

I imagine a lot of Americans hardly know China was involved let alone lost so many at the hands of Japanese invasion.

The Jewish 'holocaust' is constantly moaned about, however the Slavs lost as many and don't seem to dominate the media whenever WW2 is mentioned, the Germans also lost as many lives themselves.

The RAF systematically destroyed entire cities full of civilians out of malice from the people. To be associated with such an organisation is sometimes shameful.

The Japan Situation

The use of nuclear weapons on Japan was quite 'militarily' justifiable in those days. Simply kill so many civilians until the infrastructure cannot run or until the morale of the country is low enough for surrender. However in those days killing hundreds of thousands of civilians was fucking hunky dory.

Looking at the situation with today's battlefield doctrine you would see Japan had a very extensive and well spead out defense, to target with such high concentration that a low yield nuclear weapon would need would be almost impossible. You would need to spoof a landing at some point to get the enemy to regroup sufficiently offering a proper target.

However all the theories about showing the USSR their power and blah blah is unlikely in my opinion. I don't think the Americans are forward thinking enough to do that. The fact is, killing civilians was A-OK.

If you apply today's ethics and military logic to those actions you would find very little positive effect in the use of those nuclear weapons, it would be a monstrous act with no justification.

What you cannot do is try to justify those actions today or call them civilised to any extent. Understand that war brings the worst out of people and the US had the opportunity, the motive and the weapon to commit that crime against humanity. So they did.

The France Situation

A lot of people like to pick on the French, chat about surrendering and how they are ungrateful yada yada. Imagine this scenario. An Alien force comes and occupies earth for more 'living space'. It enforces it's rule with random killings, limited movement, seizure of properties. All the world's militaries combined cannot stop this.

... A few years pass.

Suddenly riding in on a spaceship with shining armour comes another Alien state. This Alien state is here to liberate us. In the process it blows the absolute living fuck out of earth, killing almost as many people as the occupiers just did.

In addition in brings alien macdonalds along with it, green slime that you have to snort up your nose.

The people of earth are meant to Embrace the new aliens as heroes for liberty and freedom? Snort their green slime and never think about how Earth would be better off without Aliens.

Go to the Normandy beaches, the big harbour thing is still there .... in big bits. I think that quite honestly big lumps of concrete are quite ugly, if only some one had the state of mind to remove them after they left maybe France might be slightly more grateful.

A depressing summary

Looking at the rough total of 50 million. The population of the UK in 1995. It is sheerly disgusting that politicians can ruin so many lives so easily. Looking at the parrallels in today's world, have we fucking learnt a single fucking thing from so much fucking death?

Not at all ...

Edit: Numerical Error