WW2 was a loooooooong time ago

[Finkeren]

Something that came to my attention this week:

 

To us living in the year 2014, WW2 is about as far back in time as the American Civil War was for people living during WW2.

 

I wonder if the Civil War was as big a part of the collective conciousness in the US at that time, as WW2 is today?

[DD_bongodriver]

 

I wonder if the Civil War was as big a part of the collective conciousness in the US at that time, as WW2 is today?

 

isn't it still to this day?

[Bearcat]

isn't it still to this day?

 

In some circles... but it is not as widely considered as WWII is except at certain times of the year or by lovers of history.

[DD_bongodriver]

In some circles... but it is not as widely considered as WWII is except at certain times of the year or by lovers of history.

 

I'm guessing those 'some circles' would be 13 southern states in particular.

[Bearcat]

You would be correct.. Don't get me wrong though.. The Civil War is still pretty big in a few northern states.. but it is more widely remembered in more southern states..

[DD_bongodriver]

Well at least you have the war of independence to unite over....

[DB605]

Something that came to my attention this week:

 

To us living in the year 2014, WW2 is about as far back in time as the American Civil War was for people living during WW2.

 

 

 

It's still not that long time. My granpa is still alive and he was there fighting (in ww2 of course ) And when my parents were young war was ended only about 20 years ago.

[BraveSirRobin]

I wonder if the Civil War was as big a part of the collective conciousness in the US at that time, as WW2 is today?

 

Where did you get the idea that the Civil War was over?

 

[TheBlackPenguin]

Not to throw this thread off course, but another interesting reference point is the time difference between the Napoleonic Wars and WW1 was around 100 years with Waterloo being fought in 1815, a century later WW1 was being fought, so in terms of time alone we're as distant from the WW1 generation as they were from the Napoleonic War generation. In terms of style of warfare we're certainly closer to WW1, yet the type of war in WW1 was completely remote from the Napoleonic period.

[Finkeren]

In terms of style of warfare we're certainly closer to WW1, yet the type of war in WW1 was completely remote from the Napoleonic period.

This could be the basis of a very interesting discussion, because I'm not actually sure you're right, at least not in every aspect. It really depends on the perspective you employ.

 

The Technology of WW1 is ofc more regognisable to us than the Napoleonic, but I'm pretty sure a WW1 soldier would have been just as baffled by the sight of modern warfare, as a Napoleonic soldier would have been seeing WW1.

 

One example would be the organisation and tactics of the armies. WW1 armies still relied on massed infantry, volley fire and just about every battle opened with an anti-personel artillery bombardement. Soldiers and officers at platoon level weren't expected to act independently (at least not till late in the war) and once the battle was joined communication was limited to whatever signals could be given with flags and horns.

 

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, the 19th century did revolutionize warfare to a degree that had not been seen before. Still, I think the truth is more nuanced than that.

[DD_Crash]

Also the American Civil War only really affected the US while we still live with consequences of WW.