Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ken5050
Along those lines, people have written books about how the notion of manliness suffered in Britain and France immediately after WWI. The 1920's saw a younger generation of "bright young things" and a much greater acceptance of homosexuality. A generation of real men had been lost and culturally, Britain (and France) had a greatly reduced willingness to be manly and risk doing it again.

What is remarkable to me is that Germany does not seem to have had quite the same experience. They lost WWI but (perhaps because they felt "stabbed in the back") they were almost eager to do it all over again. They still had an aggressive spirit.

But after WWII you can see that all of Europe became pacifist. They don't want to fight anymore: twice was enough. Of course, they still can fight -- the men that they have are good quality and can get the job done -- but overall, as societies, they are not manly and do not relish the thought of combat.

America has held on to the tradition a lot better, but we too are certainly not the men we used to be. I think Vietnam did to us was WWI and WWII did not.

15 posted on 06/10/2011 10:36:07 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The USSR spent itself into bankruptcy and collapsed -- and aren't we on the same path now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: ClearCase_guy
What is remarkable to me is that Germany does not seem to have had quite the same experience. They lost WWI but (perhaps because they felt "stabbed in the back") they were almost eager to do it all over again. They still had an aggressive spirit.

Largely because almost none of the war was conducted on their soil. Note the difference in the French and English responses to Germany's WWII aggression.

16 posted on 06/10/2011 10:44:46 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy
"Along those lines, people have written books about how the notion of manliness suffered in Britain and France immediately after WWI....

Casualty counts that would cause outrage today were more or less expected back then. Thousands of dead day after day for months on end. This devastated the marriage aged females of both countries. Untold tens of thousands were destined to be spinsters through no fault of their own.

A sad thing on top of all the other horrors of war.

19 posted on 06/10/2011 10:51:29 AM PDT by SnuffaBolshevik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy; wideawake
Good points.

Germany's eagerness to embrace Nazism, and again launch a war is due in major part to the terms of the peace treaty. Keynes correctly predicted that it would cause Germany to take up arms again. The terms imposed left them no chocie. If you give people no hope, then death is an acceptable, if not welcome alternative. And they might well have won.

I was watching a History channel documentary recently during Civil War week. It said that the mortality rate in the Civil War, in today's population, would equate to SIX MILLION dead, with at least an equal numer of casualties, today. Would we be willing to pay such a price today?

If you've ever seen "Chariots of Fire: the opening scenes, which show the impact of the war dead, and the disfigured survivors, is among the most powerful expressions of what England went through.

20 posted on 06/10/2011 10:55:12 AM PDT by ken5050 (Save the Earth..It's the only planet with chocolate!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy; ken5050

Both excellent posts.

You may be interested in a book called Rites of Spring by a fellow named Modris Eksteins. Assigned to me by some liberal college professor years ago when I was studying WWI it details among other things the birth of “expressionism” in the postwar period and the rise of homosexuality and cross-dressing. Also on the reading list Franz Wedekind’s Frulingserwachen and a bunch of other crazy stuff. That class is most memorable to me because, as my homosexual TA whose advances I refused failed me on my final paper, it is the only class I have ever failed.


24 posted on 06/10/2011 11:08:37 AM PDT by golux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy

I think Vietnam was a result of what had already changed within the American leadership that was already in it’s 50s, 60s and 70s.


40 posted on 06/10/2011 11:58:09 AM PDT by ansel12 (Bachmann/Rollins/Romney=destruction for Bachmann, but it sure helps Romney. WHY?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson