What is taught in other nations schools about WW1/2?

I am from Canada and as we get ready to honor those who fought in our wars I found my self interested in what other nations teach their children.

In my part of Canada (with 4 veterans in my family from ww1 and 2) we see ww1 and ww2 with a strong western perspective (my home town in Saskatchewan is german and english but all Canadian ). But tell my what you experienced in school and home when you were growing up. Please only comment on your own nation. Thank you.

Well I guess we also learn it from a Western perspective, or better yet a purely European perspective. We hardly learn anything about the war in the Pacific, only that Japan conquered our Dutch East Indies and fought with the US in the Pacific. Nothing detailed like we learn about the Europe war.

In Holland education is also very fixed on the holocaust and the thing leading up to that, racism against jews and that stuff. They want to warn children about racism that way.

And we learn about the battles in Holland like Market garden, every year there are tuns of Market Garden memorial documantary's on TV and beig celebrations with Veterans parading through the streets of Arnhem. That's pretty cool. And at 5th of May we celebrate our liberation, and thank the canadians of course

All in all I think ww2 has a pretty important place in our History lessons.

We are taught little; and only in passing. Just skip through it, until we have to write three essays on the Blitz for GCSE.

Drunk Master said:

In Holland education is also very fixed on the holocaust and the thing leading up to that, racism against jews and that stuff. They want to warn children about racism that way.

Click to expand...

We also learn about the holocaust, not only in history, but also in Religion(ethics).

In Malaysia, nothing, despite us being occupied by the Japanese. It was a loaded topic since the Malays by-and-large collaborated with the invaders while some Chinese fought them (the Communist-controlled MPAJA) as guerillas.

XIII said:

In Malaysia, nothing, despite us being occupied by the Japanese. It was a loaded topic since the Malays by-and-large collaborated with the invaders while some Chinese fought them (the Communist-controlled MPAJA) as guerillas.

Click to expand...

Interesting... did the Japanese treat the people of Malaysia well? Were they an improvement from leaders before the war?

In the UK, we got the whole lot i think. WW1, 1919-1939, WW2 and the Cold War all in detail.
Perhaps the most moving of WW2 was learning about Leningrad, Stalingrad, the fall of Berlin and, of course, the Holocaust.
There was actually a school trip to Auschwitz as part of the Holocaust education, but I decided not to go... I doubt I would have been able to take it. So many people dying in that way in that small area..

Bright day
And we because of circumstances learn mostly socio-political perspective till the beginning of second war. We learn that democracy failed, and we are still hang up on being betrayed by our allies. And then we of cours are teached how we were sold again, after the war.

When I was in school I was highly disappointed in what was taught about
the wars- It was barely glossed over . Since I knew alot about both
wars I was looking forward to the studies that never happened. My 13yr
old daughter knows a little about WWII, what I have tried to tell her, but
nothing of WWI . Now they seem to not really teach anything about
the wars except for (stopping the evil Hitler) that she knows of-- not about
the causes or the actual battles. I guess that's what dad's are for .
Everything that IS taught has a certain western slant to it anyway .

In Germany, a trip to the nearest concentration camp site is basic part of school education.

In America we're given basic overviews of the Pacific and European theaters, with the events leading up to them. In my experience we don't get much attention paid to such purely European/Pacific aspects of the war/pre-war events, like the Battle of Britain, Stalingrad, Rape of Nanking, etc.

A pity, since this was an extremely interwoven conflict on all aspects. It's also not much of an overview, sadly.

In Germany we don't learn that much about ww2. We talked a bit about the blitzkrieg, then stalingrad and then d-day. The main topic is allways the holocaust (We read the first book about the third reich in primary school). I think I ahve read atleast one book about the holocaust every year.

About WW1 we only learned the reasons why the war happened and the pact of verseilles. But the period between 1919-1932 is covered very well.

Well in my country it is complusory to do Socail studys (a mix of history georaphyand economics for the first 2 years of high school. In this class all the history you learn in Early New Zealand history and the maori wars. As far as world war 1 and 2. all we learn is Gallipoli and the ANZACS.

In your 3rd, 4th and 5th year history is a optional class. In this we learned about the causes of World War One and World War two. also about New Zealand search for security after World War Two. We dont really go into the battles two much. A little about galipoli and Crete. Also Monte Cassino. I dont know what class we learn about the Jews and the nazis. But we do learn it.

We (in the UK) don't learn about the war itself, but we do learn about Hitler and the Holocuast. Actually, we sorta skip WW2 altogether - we jump right from 1938 to the Berlin blockade. Other than that its a straight ride from the Great Depression up to the Berlin wall being torn down.

Edit:

nonconformist said:

We are taught little; and only in passing. Just skip through it, until we have to write three essays on the Blitz for GCSE.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah. I forgot about the Blitz stuff.

In America:

I recall learning about all aspects of both wars. Who was in it, why it was started, major battles or turning points, high & low points. As an American, I can honestly say there was no favoritism to our own participation in the wars. It was an all around lesson in each case. Unfortunately, there isn't enough time to get into either war thoroughly enough to better reflect it's importance, especially at the age that it's taught at. I still learn more about the wars every year, particularily from books & documentaries.

My school (In the US) barely mentioned WWI, only as a way to introduce WWII. Then, WWII was mainly The pacific theatre, the holocaust and hitler. Little on any other part of the war is ever mentioned...

Maybe I should mention that my prep school education was in the 80's & 90's. I'm starting to get the impression that (here in America) the courses aren't as thorough as they once were.

In Germany the focus is laid on how it came to WW2 and the ideas of the Nazi party and how this evolved into the Holocaust.

Most battles - even Stalingrad - are merely just noted as cornerstones of developement.

Military Operations like Poland, the Westfeldzug (France), and at the eastern front till the fall of Berlin are more taught in a quite general way. Africa and the Afrika Korps are usually only worth 2 minutes.

This is in Bavaria, I do not know if it is different in other German federal states. This is a testament of the anti-war attitude that developed in Germany after WW2.

Famous Generals, major historical battles, such things are not taught, more how a crazy ideology could make so many Germans follow Hitler and believe in him, how things like Auschwitz and stuff happened.

BTW, the Battle of Britain is also no major topic, you do not get any information about disadvantages of the Germans (low range Fighters) and advantages of the British (radar) and stuff like that at all.

But after the war, you hear all about the Cold War and how Germany was divided up and stuff like that.

As one can see, I am not so fond of these kind of history lessons, though they have a very acceptable idea behind them, this is not the right way to deal with WW2 IMO. It deserves more attention IMO, especially as many people are still more interested in WW2 than in the Middle Ages e.g.

Hunter said:

Interesting... did the Japanese treat the people of Malaysia well? Were they an improvement from leaders before the war?

Click to expand...

Depends on what race you were. The Japs didn't really like us Chinese Malaysians (or rather Chinese Malayans, then.) They treated the Malays relatively well since most of them collaborated with the Japs in the belief that they'd free them from the "evil yoke of the British". The propaganda about the East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere really took hold amongst the Malayans then. For the Indians, I'm not too sure. The textbooks never mentioned them but they probably collaborated with the Japs. After all, why fight a bunch of people for no apparent reason?
As the Chinese were treated badly, they decided to fight back as the MPAJA (Malayan People's Anti-Japanese Army) which was controlled by Kuomintang but very communist in philosophy.. Weird...

But yeah, to sum up, Malaysian textbooks just said that Imperialists are bad, etc.etc.etc. The usual anti-colonial doohikey.
Although they gladly accepted British rule again in 1945. (Before protesting against a 'move to independence' policy in the form of Malayan Union. Weird...)

Oh, and in World War I, we were too busy fighting the evil Imperialists to free our states. Or something like that..