[mdlug-discuss] [Recommendations] Good historical documentaries

[Aaron Kulkis]

Raymond McLaughlin wrote:
> Robert Meier wrote:
>> Historians,
>>
>> A friend of mine is interested in learning about history.
>>
>> Can you recommend any accurate historical documentaries that cover.
>>
>> o World War I
>> o World War II
>> o United States
> Most of PBS's "The American Experience" segments seem well researched
> and thoughtful.
> 
>> ?
>>
>>
>>
>> For World War II, I named "The World at War"
> 
> I recall that the "The World at War" series covered both WWI and WWII. I
> can't find it right off in the IMDB, but the most recent time I saw an
> episode of the series (like 20 years ago) was about the "Rape Of
> Belgium", complete with maps with arrows, really grainey, flickery film
> clips, and the same stern, british voice, (Lawence Olivier I guess).
> 
> 
>> (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071075/)
>> (http://www.amazon.com/World-War-30th-Anniversary/dp/B0002F6AH0)

This seems to be highly recommended:
<http://www.amazon.com/First-World-War-Complete/review/product/B0009S2K9C/ref=cm_cr_dp_synop?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending#R2UBC8023W05TH>
but here is a very interesting non-recommendation:


"My wife who is an art historian have just finished the
whole set! Its amazing. As visual history its excellent.
But to be critical, there are some reservations that I
must bring out that others may want to dispute and correct
me. My wife, to begin with her comments, wanted more about
Hungary. She's Hungarian and thought it was important
to talk about the Central Powers and Eastern Europe. Not
much if any particular was said. I thought the America
role was underestimated. In fact, I think it was made
fun of as if it was only a matter of a threat than
actual fighting force like the English and French--a
bunch of over-fed, Johnny-come-lately, boy scouts.
Only Wilson and in after the war did the documentary
take seriously America's role. Nothing was said about
its soldiers, etc. But I won't stress that so much as
something that keeps bothering me about the ending.
For you see I saw the documentary when it first came
out what seems like years ago. And I swear at the very
end there was a voice quoting a letter or Mein Kampf
Hitler. Paraphrasing, it said something like "all I
saw at around me was devasation and emptiness,
therefore I decided to go into politics." It gave
one the errie and scary connection that was right
between the cause of WW2. It did not leave it on a
sentimental note as it does. I am now thinking I
saw some other documentary!!!If anyone can enlighten
me to this please let me know--did I see the same or
was it another?"

This touches on something which is often overlooked
today..  WW2 was PREDICTED the Treaty of Versailles
was still being edited for it's final form -- weeks
before the Treaty Papers were drawn up for signing,
precisely because everyone could see that Germany was
getting a raw deal, which would inspire them to look
for a leader who would inspire them to seek revenge.
More than anything, Germany's actions in WW2 were
about seeking revenge for the Treaty of Versailles,
and the economic chaos in its wake, punishing various
groups for various reasons, some legitimate, and some
not legitimate.

What's most interesting, is both this ... and Wilson's
police state that served as a model for Mussolini
once he took power...is noted in a book about a completely
non-political subject -- the influenza pandemic of 1918-19
-- precisely because
1: The author believes that the flue had a detrimental
   effect on Wilson during the Versailles negotiations
2: The Wilson administration was so high-handed against
   ANYONE who showed the slightest doubt about anything
   that America was doing, that to even express concern
   about the flu.  There were in every city and town
   "four minute men" who, before every movie, theater,
   or sporting event, were to give a patriotic speech
   of approximately 4 minutes or so.  The "Blue Eagle"
   program, in which businesses were harassed into
   signing agreemtns to participate in the program, then
   displaying the program logo in the window, and thus
   pledged to do business ONLY with other participants.
   Newspaper editors and reporters were routinely thrown
   into jail for writing anything which could be
   construed as "hurting the war effort" -- which
   included sounding the alarm about the flu outbreak.

   Thus, while a few researchers were aware of it from
   the first outbreak at Camp Gordon, Georgia, which
   was serious (normally young adult men capable of
   passing a military entrance physical of that era
   will be made ill by the flu, but none killed by it)
   enough to kill a few soldiers, every time it spread,
   it took the local populace by complete surprise
   because newspapers were afraid to publish any reports
   of this lethal outbreak and its spread, for fear of
   being tossed in jail.  Almost all of them languished
   in jail for years until Warren G. Harding(R) pardoned
   all of them.

Something I came across in the book "The Arms of Krupp"
is that turn-of-the-century Germany was, much like
ancient Greece and the modern-day Arab world, hyper-
masculanized: women were viewed as being good for
nothing more than baby machines, and so homosexuality
was rampant -- to the point that in the late 1890's,
throughout Europe, it was called "The German Disease."
One high-ranking General appeared before Emperor
Wilhelm in a tutu and did a rather long ballet
performance, before collapsing on the floor and
dying in place.  According to the historian, the only
comment on this performance was not that it seemed
in any way out of place, but that an old General
could dance a ballet in a way that was "so lovely"
Nobody commented that this was in any way strange,
or even seemed to be out of place for a general
of the German Army.[*]

Anyways, back to the main line of thought...
This performance by the General seems to be a clue
for reason behind the Nazis subsequent persecution
of homosexuals.  The General staff had a lot of
homosexuality, and they were part of those who were
responsible for losing the war -- so [and here is
where the typical Nazi leap of logic to a completely
unsupported conclusion takes place] KILL THEM ALL!



[*]	While nobody would ever make an accusation that,
	say, dancer Mikhail Baryshnikoff of being a
	homosexual, neither would anyone think it normal
	for him to show up in a room wearing a ballet
	tutu, and perform for the ad hoc audience (of
	those assembled for other business) consisting
	only of a male national political leader, his
	all male court of advisors, and his all male
	senior military leadership.  Most everybody,
	even in these modern times, would consider such
	a situation to be rather odd.  Performing before
	an audience with a significant amount of women,
	yes, but for a bunch of men only -- no.

	For those who have never been to a ballet
	performance, having been in St. Petersburg,
	Russia in June, 1998, and I saw a performance
	at the historic Mussorgskii Theater.  St.
	Petersburg is considered to be THE CITY to go
	to train for ballet; the only reason the Bolshoi
	Ballet in Moscow has the best performers is
	because Moscow is the capital.

	Anyways, I would say that the best way to
	characterize ballet is as a high class form
	of soft porn, performed before a live audience.
	It's not in any explicitly sexualized acts, but
	in the nature of the form itself, including
	(especially?) the attire.  There is no way that
	a skin-fitting tutu on someone who is young,
	energetic, and in peak physical condition
	jumping and prancing around a stage can do
	anything without also being a, well, what in
	modern terms would be called titillation and
	arousal -- all this while maintaining plausible
	deniability under the guise of "theater."**

	Remember this if your wife ever wants to drag
	you to a ballet -- of course, if it's an American
	ballet company, with all of the stretched beyond
	reason anti-discrimination laws taken past logical
	extremes, don't count on the women, at any rate,
	being all that physically attractive.

	The Russians, on the other hand, have no such laws,
	nor is a visiting ballet company held to such laws
	for their performance cast.

	[**]	On a sociological level, ballet tickets
		have traditionally been EXPENSIVE -- my
		guess is to both keep out the riff-raff,
		and to filter preferentially for the wealthy
		-- after all, most of the ballerinas are
		single, and what better way to advertise
		to men their physical attractiveness, AND
		select for only those men who see enough
		performances to get through the various
		'gatekeepers' within a theater to make
		social contact with a ballerina?  At the
		same time, there seems to be an repetitive
		theme of the ballerinas, especially the
		prima ballerina, being the object of
		attention (even if not affection) of one
		or more of the male performers.  This
		automatically kicks in a psychological
		reaction which is described as "social
		proof," which further elevates the
		perceived desirability of the ballerina --
		although this effect is more powerful on
		women then on men.  Note how many women
		are attracted to some men who are otherwise
		completely unattractive -- for no other
		reason than "he's famous" -- the ultimate
		form of social proof.
		For more information, read the book
		"Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion"
		and/or "Influence: Science and Practice" by
		Robert Cialdini, a professor of Psychology
		who actually got his butt out of the office,
		off the campus, and into the real world to
		take a look at what's actually happening.
		This Wikipedia entry is OK:
		http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_proof
		This page fully defines Cialdini's 6
		"weapons of influence", including Social Proof.
		http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Cialdini