Last Blog

This is my last blog of the semester, and the subject we're studying right now has been one of the most interesting to me. However, pretty much everything that we have studied has been of some interest to me - that's why I signed up for a 20th century European history class. Not because I knew everything about the subject, but because I was really interested in learning more about it.

I especially enjoyed learning about the history of France and Germany. The sheer magnitude of information contained in the history of Nazi Germany amazed me - before studying it, I had no idea there could possibly be that many perspectives on a single event in history. I think that's one of the things that has been most interesting to me this semester - viewing history as what it is, a story. This was my first history class at UGA, and I didn't really know what to expect. I have been pleasantly surprised at how much I have learned, not just about European history but history in general.

For my last post, I guess I will comment on the topic of the past couple weeks that has been most interesting to me - the uprising of Polish workers. Throughout history, at least what I have studied, the successful revolts are almost always aided by some sort of intellectual or "enlightened" class. To read about what happened in Poland was really interesting and was something I had known nothing about prior to this class. Even though the original movements of solidarity were not "successful", they eventually led to the overthrow of the Soviets. It serves as a nice reminder that anything can be possible, no matter how unrealistic it seems.

I have enjoyed this class, and blogging bi-weekly has been a nice way to interact with my classmates regarding the material covered.

Vichy France: Did it serve a purpose?

Last week, we discussed the topic of France before and after the war. The state of Vichy was created during the war to give France some sense of independence from the Nazis. While it may have succeeded superficially, Paxton argues that in actuality, Vichy was the same or worse than any other occupied nation. I agree with him - I think that Vichy was more of a negative than a positive for France and its citizens.

When looking at Vichy compared to other European nations during the years of WWII, it is hard to find many positives. Inflation here was some of the worst in all of Europe - Germany effectively ruined its economy, and took away resources and labor. While there may have been lower rates of forced laborers, it was only because there were closer places to look for this. There was more hunger here than most of Europe, another fact that shows Vichy's ineffectiveness. Vichy's Jews were treated as badly as any other nation's, and the government facilitated the transfer into Nazi hands. The fact that a nation such as Denmark was able to get most of its Jews out shows how little effort was put into their protection in France.

So, as a whole, did Vichy "save France?' I think that answer to this is definitely no. The people of Vichy experienced the same problems as the rest of occupied Europe. Germany never intended to exterminate all of France - another reason it is unfair to say that Vichy "saved" France. There was nothing to save. The parts of France that went under Nazi control were able to return to relative normalcy after the war, and it wasn't because of Vichy's existence. Vichy pretended to strive to protect the "traditionalist" aspects of French culture, but in reality, they promoted the opposite. It kept the elites in control of society, something that had to be changed by de Gaulle in order for France to be successful again in the 1960s. Basically, it did not really protect anything. Vichy helped the Nazis get what they wanted. The only things that Vichy kept alive were the things that France had to change in order to remain relevant years after the war was over.