May 8 marked the 77th commemoration of Victory in Europe Day, when the globe collectively remembers the Allies’ formal acceptance of Germany’s unconditional surrender in World War II.
In 1945, the world celebrated this day with a level of enthusiasm and vigor that seemed unmatched at the time. Delirious crowds took to New York’s Times Square, London’s Trafalgar Square, and Paris’ Champs-Élysées to rejoice over the conclusion of the bloodiest war in history. They marched together, laughed together and cried together.
Today, however, few Americans seem to ponder the significance of or even know of the existence of V-E Day. This reality speaks to a larger problem of the world’s general ignorance of basic World War II history.
This epidemic is more severe than many think. Almost one-fifth of the respondents to a national telephone survey of 17-year-olds indicated that they did not know who the United States’ enemies were during the conflict. Another nationwide survey of adults under 40 found that more than 1 in 10 respondents had never heard of the term “Holocaust.”
It is not as if schools are not teaching World War II history — they are. However, their general reliance on textbooks and perspective-focused source materials are leading students down a path of rote memorization, indifference, and a malignant relativism that is preventing them from retaining the information and learning the lessons of the past. That is a shame because few events — current, historical or otherwise — offer more essential lessons than V-E Day.
Take, for example, the recent Russian invasion of Ukraine. Does Vladimir Putin’s incursion symbolize a repeat of the Nazi annexation of the Sudetenland (Hitler’s effort to unite all Germans, including Sudeten Germans, into one nation), or does it represent something different? Policymakers and diplomats must consider this question as they mull the necessity of future sanctions and military actions. However, too many are unable to draw any parallels.
Another critical lesson from V-E Day is how rigid adherence to ideology can affect one’s success in war.
For example, at times, the U.S. was willing to compromise certain democratic capitalist principles by imposing increased economic regulations, such as price controls, to protect itself in wartime. It also went against a prior norm, allowing married women to enter the industrial workforce to a much greater extent than ever before to cover labor and supply chain shortages.
Germany, on the other hand, remained utterly inflexible. The Nazi regime was so convinced of the correctness of its own twisted ideology that it continued the Holocaust even during the final days of war, siphoning critical resources and men away from the front lines of battle. Ultimately, Hitler’s pigheaded adherence to Nazism spelled the end for Germany.
Nazi Germany’s demise speaks to a broader lesson: what ideological barriers are currently holding America back? While we should always stand up for what is right, we often confuse what is right for what is politically or culturally preferable. To see through the haze that ideology casts over us, we cannot rely on good judgment alone. We also need sound knowledge of the past.
History presents answers to our current problems. We just need to have the courage to search for them. Rather than have students memorize narratives found in textbooks and other perspective-focused sources, educators should challenge them to sift through the contrasting perspectives found in the primary documents of World War II so they can come to their own conclusions. This level of engagement allows them to personally connect to and uncover the past lessons in ways that most routine textbook readings would never permit.
As a country, we do not need to parade in the streets on V-E Day as we did in 1945. We should, however, use this time to analyze, reflect, and discuss the lessons of this fateful day and global war. Only then will we be able to see clearly and preserve the rights and victories we have secured as a nation over the last two centuries.
John Moser is a professor of history and chair of the Department of History and Political Science at the Ashbrook Center, an independent center at Ashland University that seeks to eliminate bias in education through the study of primary documents.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
