Comparison Essay: World War 1 vs. World War 2

To gain power or control is a concept as old as time. Generations through generation have all garnered and lost power whether it is through the land, political influence, or religion. Through this, war is a common entity that power and control have flowed through ever since weapons have been created, in any way shape, or form, or man has found ways to gain power one another. Whether it is through combat, diplomacy, or combinations of such ideas, the concept of war is not a new one. A raging fire throughout history, war has engulfed several nations into its burning flame involving even multiple nations into a global effort. While such a large-scale war is rare, a worldwide, multi-national showcase of power, is not rare but has appeared in several forms. As such wars are indeed recurrent, the idea of total war would prove to be more d such as the two back-to-back world wars that occurred throughout the early 20th century. While these two catastrophic and destructive wars are rooted in different grounds, sources of opinion and several voices might place the context that they are one of the same war, or, in other words, the same war but split in-between time. Again, the two world wars are part of the same total war that spanned multiple nations, ethnicities, and powers. However, the argument can be proven invalid for several different reasons. While the argument can stand independent and true, it is inherently flawed because the two wars started because of contrasting reasons, and the key actors within them had different reasonings for their overall existence, or motivation for the wars.

To start, the two wars are not the same, as their beginnings are not one of the same or a continuation of one another, but instead rooted in two entirely different sources of motivation. To put into context, the growth of the two wars is one of the reasons for how the wars would turn out and how they would become two distinct efforts. Moreover, the first world war started differently than the second one, which, in the end, makes them two contrasting reasons for war, a considerable point for why they are two separate wars. According to Document A, it states that "In June of 1914, a young Bosnian Serb opposing the Austro-Hungarian Empire assassinated a key political figure in Sarajevo." This short key point shows the central initiation that sent the first world war into action. However, as the document later proves, "The assassination may have been a surprise, but everyone's desire to fight was not" (Document A). This section shows that not only was the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, that is, a catalyst, but an overall reason to engage in war. Now, why is this information crucial? It is important to know that before this, European nations were ready to take action and take imperialist efforts within the continent prior to the assassination, as the document quotes, "Europeans had big plans beyond Europe where they sought resources and markets to build wealth through imperialism" (Document A). This differentiates from the beginning of the second world war, as it was a product of shame, humiliation, and the collapse of the German nation after the first war. Furthermore, this was a direct result of the problematic Treaty of Versailles, the final product of the Paris Peace Conference, held after World War I. As said in Document F, "Despite noble aspirations for peace, the outcome of the Paris Peace Conference did more to reinforce hostility by singling out Germany as the sole instigator of the First World War. The Great Depression and the economic protectionism it engendered would then serve as the catalyst for the hostility to manifest itself in the rise of the Nazi Party and increasing imperialist ambitions among world nations." This lengthy quote showed that because of the blame placed upon Germany after the first world war, it gave instability and humiliation to the people, which Hitler would later build upon to grant himself more influence and power within Germany. Specifically, "That seed was Article 231, which with its label 'the war guilt clause' placed sole blame for the war on Germany and its need to make reparations payments as punishment" (Document F). With this specification, it showed reason for the German party to seek power, land, and economic reparations as the Treaty of Versailles would dismantle their country, in which the second world war would arise from Hitler's newfound, and extreme nationalist approach, unlike the first world war when Europe was seeking imperialism as a majority. In the end, the two world wars are not one of the same because of these two reasons of their beginnings, showing that the roots of the war are a direct correlation to their events.