American vs British WW2 documentaries

At the moment I'm watching a brilliant documentary about ww1, baset on the works of Hew Strachan.

I'm learning a lot of new things. Like the german atrocities agaionst civilians in France and Belgium, the russians against the jews when they invaded Prussia, Austria-Hungary when they invaded Serbia, etc etc, the list goes on. And of course everyboddy knows about tge armenian deathmarch.
 
I think you are attacking a straw man here.
"Attacking"?
I guess, but I struggle with the modern interpretation that the Second World War started with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria- it just doesn't seem global enough an event
I was simply explaining to him that that wasn't the "modern interpretation" at all.
 
True, I was wrong to call it the "modern interpretation". I do remember getting into some heated arguments with postmodernists about it, though. You know, history students (and faculties) that think the next step for history is to let cultural sensitivities get in the way of facts (and deny the validity of said "facts" for good measure). They honestly thought I was being Eurocentric and blinkered for saying WW2 started in 1939.
 
True, I was wrong to call it the "modern interpretation". I do remember getting into some heated arguments with postmodernists about it, though. You know, history students (and faculties) that think the next step for history is to let cultural sensitivities get in the way of facts (and deny the validity of said "facts" for good measure). They honestly thought I was being Eurocentric and blinkered for saying WW2 started in 1939.

Tell them that using the English language is Westcentric and that if they want to discuss matters with you further they should only do so through the medium of Swahili.
 
That, and rampant ADHD editing seems less prevalent. Last time I tried watching an American documentary I also had to stop because I got too annoyed at the way they had to recap everything every fifteen minutes.

We have always the need to look over our shoulder to be sure our low information voters are still tagging along.

Sometime we even let them lead from behind.
 
WW2 could well have had 2 separate starts, one in Asia and one in Europe. And btw, I don't think WW1 truly qualified as a "world" war. Scale of either theaters of WW2 easily dwarfed the entire WW1.
Though the main theater of fighting in WWI was overwhelmingly restricted to Europe, the point is that Europe at the time ruled over something like 60 to 75 % of the whole world, which means that the whole world was involved.
 
Top Bottom