A recent conversation with a friend gave me pause.

We were talking about history, and I think I was rambling about being a fan of “recent” history (perhaps more accurately described as an interest in cultural studies, but oh well).  I then made these three statements (in paraphrase):

1. I’m interested in the post-World War II history.
2. I’m interested in WWI era history.
3. I’m not that into WWII: I think it has been over-examined / over-described / over-inflated.

And then it hit me like a freight train.  We are doomed to repeat it.  Of course, we aren’t doomed to repeat that in the same way, but we are doomed to create unnecessary horrors because we forgot to learn one simple thing: why.

Let me explain myself.  World War II, as we all know, has several primary conflicts:

1. A European land / air war
2. An American / Japanese war
3. The Holocaust

Our perpetual focus on the Holocaust and the evil expressed by Hitler’s Nazi-controlled Germany certainly serves as a terrifying testament to the evil of which humanity is certainly capable.

At the same time, we neglect to examine why Hitler acted this way.  We either smooth it over, simply suggesting that he is “pure evil,” making the moral of the story to avoid electing leaders with a simultaneous God and inferiority complexes.  As if we could even pick a Hitler out of a lineup before he amasses power.

The other response is to hide our heads and suggest that because Hitler was evil, there is no point in determining why: as if his reasoning were so tainted, we could not possibly hope to gain anything from it.  This is much more dangerous.  We witnessed this line of argument after September 11, 2001: al-Qaeda gave us many reasons for these acts of murder, before and after, but we decided to ignore them.

What occurs to me, however, is that a new problem arises from this.  Not only are we ignoring the simple, localized Why–the one that must have made sense in 1939 to this group or in 1941 to this group–but also the bigger Why.  The Why that spawned the conditions that led to WWII, the uneasy European alliance, and the humiliation described by many Nazi sympathizers in the 1930s.  The Why can be found, of course, in the Great War.

Now, the reason I said at the beginning that I was more interested in World War I is this: we can see in WWII the direct face of evil, whereas WWI is the quintessential example of human misunderstanding.  Instead of personifying evil in a single national figure (Hitler), WWI possess a high level of moral ambiguity–no obvious “rights” and “wrongs”.  It was believed at the time that it was the war that would end all wars, but it served, in some ways, as the benchmark by which the next war would need to surpass.

There are so many interesting aspects to the Great War, but let me use only these few components:

1. It began with a single assassination.
2. The countries involved were forced to mobilize in a show of strength.
3. The German military put into place a principle of “mobilization means war” (think: threats should be treated as threats–not bluffs)
4. After the war, France and Great Britain, operating from a place of hurt and vindictiveness, encouraged the United States to support harsh, draconian punishments on Germany.

The simplicity of the situation is made insufferable by our willingness to ignore it.  Germany, the aggressor, was treated like a pariah and was therefore emboldened to reconstitute their military strength.  Germany, the responder, was not only acting to protect and defend a weaker ally, but it was simply calling a bluff.  France and Britain, the victims, used the international community to humiliate and dehumanize the German military.  France and Britain, the defenders, responded to a hostile occupation of territory with a harsh rebuke in an attempt to make it so that this kind of war would never happen again.  This, of course, planted the seeds that made Hitler’s climb to power incredibly easy.  A similar relationship to conflict can be found in the last several decades in Israel, in which pro-conflict candidates have had a stranglehold of the top post, while pro-peace candidates are boxed out.

My point?  By 1) focusing solely on the atrocity, 2) classifying it as evil, and 3) only occasionally asking why, 4) we set ourselves up to repeat the very conflict 5) by ignoring its precipitating causes.

The Holocaust doesn’t happen without WWI.  And WWI served as a very different conflict from WWII.

What are our simple misunderstandings today?  What are the things that will get us involved in a conflict now that will cause a greater atrocity tomorrow?  Is it possible that we are already in the midst of part 1?

The church’s failure in WWII, especially, are well documented and obvious.  But perhaps its time we learned our lesson from history.