History is generally taught through the consideration of two opposing forces; black and white sides. What are the possible impacts and implications of this process of teaching and study history?
In a war, there are two opposing sides: the good/white side and the bad/black side. Yet what makes one side black and the other white? Are they not both fighting to defend their beliefs? Are they both not killing thousands of people? Then what is it that decides which side is good and which one is bad? Although they are the same, why do we consider one “good” and one “bad”?
It all depends on the winner. While a war rages on, both sides will criticize each other and refer to them as the bad ones; yet this does not matter, for once the war is over the winner will be the “good” and the losers will be the “bad”.
Yet can a whole country bad? We see in All Quiet on the Western Front that not even the German soldiers quite understand why they must hate their enemy, for as Kropp says, “…we are here to protect our fatherland. And the French are over there to protect their fatherland. Now who is in the right?” (Remarque, p.203).
The ideas they are fighting for might be different, but when it comes down to the soldiers, the ones who are actually fighting, they are all the same. It is like when Paul stabs the French Soldier, Gérard Duval: “… you were only an idea to me before, an abstraction that lived in my mind and called forth its appropriate response. It was that abstraction I stabbed. But now, for the first time, I see you are a man like me.” (Remarque, p.223). Paul realizes here that the men he is fighting are simple men like him; who suffer, fear and die just like they do. In reality, they just fight because they must; and so the Germans fight the “bad side” that shoots and attacks their country; and so do the French. Even if at some point Paul and his comrades realize that in reality they are fighting the idea that the other side is the “bad” side and that the people are not actually “bad”, “...their riffles and guns are aimed against us, and if we don’t destroy them, they will destroy us.” (Remarque, p.115).
When the winner calls themselves the good side, it is to excuse themselves from wasting the lives of so many people. It is a way for them to feel better about the fact that they have killed so many (often times these people being innocent) to defend an ideal. Then is it fair to learn only form one side? For if what we now consider the “bad” side had won the war, would we not consider them the “good” side and despise the ideals that the other side fought for?
Thus, I don’t believe there is a clear white side and a clear black side; I believe it to be more of a collective gray side. Each force had their reasons to fight, and we should learn from both sides; because in the same way one side committed atrocities, so did the other. If we study only from the victorious side, we are missing out on a lot of information, and learning only what the winning side wants us to. To truly understand what happened and what the people felt during the war, we should learn from both sides; because in a war there are two stories, and if one is being omitted we only get a biased picture of what really happened.
Remarque, Erich Maria. All Quiet On The Western Front. US, New York. Ballantine Books, 1957-58
I agree with "because in a war there are two stories, and if one is being omitted we only get a biased picture of what really happened. " because, both sides do need to be told, or else what we're learning is only half of the story, and in order to evaluate the event we need to know both sides.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, my main disagreement with your post is " the winner will be the “good” and the losers will be the “bad" because, there have been many events in history, where the "winner" isn't necessarily the "good" side. Instances where tyrants have been victorious in wars and people have had to endure prolonged periods of suffering or occupation, before being liberated. (ex: Cambodia - Khmer Rouge also South Africa - ANC) but other than this, i agree with you're view on it being a collective gray side.