제1차 세계 대전: 원인, 영향 및 유산

가장 파괴적이지는 않았지만 제1차 세계대전은 전 세계에 영향을 미치며 환멸을 불러일으키고 문학과 예술의 표현을 변화시켰습니다.

### 제1차 세계대전: 모든 것을 바꾼 전쟁
* 💥 제1차 세계대전은 가장 파괴적인 전쟁은 아니었지만, 사회의 시각을 근본적으로 바꾸어 오늘날에도 여전히 영향을 미치는 **냉소주의와 아이러니를 정상화**시켰습니다.
* 🔍 오스트리아 대공 프란츠 페르디난트의 암살로 촉발된 **이 전쟁**은 유럽 주요 강대국들의 연쇄적인 동맹과 동원으로 이어졌습니다.
* ⚙ 기관총과 철조망과 같은 신기술의 도입과 **구식 전술이 결합**되면서 서부 전선은 **치명적인 교착 상태**에 빠졌습니다.
* 🌍 제1차 세계대전은 여러 나라의 전투원이 참여한 전 세계적인 분쟁이었으며, **전쟁 후 민족주의 운동의 출현**으로 이어졌습니다.
* 💔 이 전쟁은 **1,500만 명 이상이 사망**하고 **2,000만 명이 부상**당하는 등 엄청난 파괴력을 지닌 전쟁이었습니다.
* 🍺 술은 군인들이 혹독한 환경과 전투에 대한 두려움에 대처하는 데 **중요한 역할**을 했습니다.
* 🌐 제1차 세계대전의 여파로 베르사유 조약은 **전쟁의 책임을 독일에 돌렸고**, 이는 독일 경제와 정치 제도에 파멸적인 결과를 가져왔습니다.
* 📜 또한 전쟁은 **러시아에서 볼셰비키의 부상, 미국의 지정학적 영향력 증대, '잃어버린 세대'의 작가와 예술가들이 느끼는 일반적인 실망감과 냉소주의**로 이어졌습니다.

Hi, I’m John Green. This is Crash Course
World History, and today we’re gonna talk about World War I. The so-called Great War? World War I wasn’t the most destructive
war, or the first total war, and it certainly wasn’t - despite its billing - the war to
end all wars. But it was the war to change all wars. World War I changed our outlook.
It normalized cynicism and irony, which, I think you’ll agree, are kind of dominant lenses for
describing our world today. Basically, I’d argue that World War I helped make possible everything from
The Simpsons to intentionally unattractive mustaches. Mr. Green, Mr. Green! Are you referring to
me? Oh, Me From the Past, you’re an embarrassment
to our family. Also to all our other selves. [theme music] Most people think of World War I as a tragedy
because it didn’t need to happen and didn’t

really accomplish much, except for creating
social and economic conditions that made World War II possible. So when we talk about the causes of
the war, inevitably, we’re also assigning blame. The immediate cause was, of course, the assassination
in Sarajevo of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914, by a Bosnian Serb
nationalist named Gavrilo Princip. Quick aside: It’s worth noting that the first big war
of the 20th century began with an act of terrorism. So Franz Ferdinand wasn’t particularly well-liked
by his uncle, the Emperor Franz Joseph - now that is a mustache! But even so, the assassination
led Austria to issue an ultimatum to Serbia, whereupon Serbia accepted some, but not all,
of Austria’s demands, leading Austria to declare war against Serbia. And then Russia,
due to its alliance with the Serbs, then mobilized its army; Germany, because it had an alliance
with Austria, told Russia to stop mobilizing.

which Russia failed to do. So then Germany
mobilized its own army, declared war on Russia, cemented an alliance with the Ottomans, and then
declared war on France, because, you know, France. Germany’s War plan, the Schlieffen Plan,
required that it invade France in the most expedient way possible, which as you can see,
is via Belgium. And Great Britain was a friend of Belgium - I mean, as much as anyone can be a friend
of Belgium - and so they declared war on Germany. So by August 4th, all the major powers of
Europe are at war with each other. By the end of the month, Japan, honoring its alliance
with Britain, would be at war with Germany and Austria as well. When all was said and
done, counting colonies and spheres of influence, the world map would eventually look like this.
You’ll never guess who wins. So there were many opportunities NOT to mobilize
and declare war, none of which were taken.

Some blame the web of alliances itself, which is what Woodrow Wilson tried to fix with the League of Nations. Some blame Russia, the first big country to mobilize. Some blame Germany for the inflexibility of the Schlieffen Plan. Leninists claim war grew out of imperialism and was fueled by capitalist rivalries; and others claim it was a war between Germany’s radical modernism and Britain’s traditional conservatism. But if I had to assign blame, I’d go with the alliance system and the cultural belief that war was, in general, good for nations. War helped define who was them and who was us, and doing that strengthened the idea of us. And before World War I, war was perceived to be necessary and often even glorious. The trench warfare on the Western Front is most famous for its brutal futility - Great Britain and France on one side, Germany on the other, with no man’s land between. World

War I was a writer’s war, and there’s
a lot of metaphorical resonance in living men digging holes where they would in time
die. The lines of trenches on the Western Front covered only about 400 miles as the
crow flies, but because of the endless zigzagging, the trenches themselves may have run as much
as 25,000 miles. But the stalemate of trench warfare wasn’t
seen on every front. Especially at the beginning of the war, there was a lot of offensive movement,
especially in the initial German strikes, especially on the Eastern Front, the Germans
were pretty successful against the Russians, who had a large but pretty hapless army. Also,
for those blessed few of you who sat through all of Lawrence of Arabia, you’ll remember
that T. E. Lawrence’s exploits took place in the context of World War I, with the British
battling the Ottomans. This brings up an important point: World War
I featured combatants from around the world

- Britain’s army, especially, included soldiers
from India, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, who were just happy to be invited.
Africans served with the French, and for a lot of these people, their experiences helped
build nationalist movements when survivors returned home after the war. That’s about as close as we get to a silver
lining. The war itself was incredibly destructive. Over 15 million people were killed and over
20 million wounded. In France, 13.3% of the male population between the age of 15 and
49 died in the war. The war also saw a lot of civilians die, especially in the Ottoman
Empire where more than 2 million of the 3 million people killed were non-combatants. But like so many other wars, World War I’s
most efficient killer was disease. Stupid disease, always hijacking history. Dysentery,
typhus, and cholera were rampant, and otherwise

minor injuries would prove fatal when gangrene
set in. I mean, 25% of arm wounds among German soldiers were fatal. And that’s not even
to mention the famous influenza epidemic that broke out toward the end of the war, which
killed three times as many people as the war itself. The main reason the war was so deadly was
the combination of new technology and outdated tactics. While we may think about tanks, airplanes,
and poison gas, all of which made their debut in the First World War, the two most devastating
technologies were American: machine guns and barbed wire. Attempting to march in lines
towards an enemy’s trench, soldiers of both sides were mowed down by machine gun fire. According to one German machine gunner at
the battle of the Somme in 1916, “The [British] officers went in front. I noticed one of them
walking calmly, carrying a walking stick.

When we started firing, we just had to load and reload. They went down in their hundreds. You didn’t have to aim, we just fired into them.” At the Somme, the British lost 60,000 men in the first day of fighting. Remember the old colonialist verse, “Whatever happens / we have got / the maxim gun / and they have not”? Yeah, well, now everybody had machine guns. One of the things we try to remember here at Crash Course is that people both make history and are made by it. World War I brings this fact into stark relief because we know so much about the soldiers who fought in it, and how they wrote about the war really changed our relationship with systemic violence. For most soldiers, there was nothing glamorous or heroic about this war. For the British, for example, the trenches were two things above all: wet and smelly. The dampness came from the fact that the British trenches were in the wettest part of Flanders. The smell

was mainly decomposing flesh. Nothing glorious
about that. On the upside, soldiers were at least rarely
hungry, and there was a lot of food from home, which is worth underscoring, because it reminds
us that home wasn’t very far away. Even for the British, at their closest the front
was only 70 miles from England. They could read newspapers from London one day later
than Londoners could. While going “over the top” - Stan, no
puns in this episode! - Right, while going “over the top” of the trench to cross
no-man’s land and attack the enemy trench is what lights our romantic imagination, most
soldiers’ lives were dominated by the fear of shelling. According to a journal published
by French soldiers: “There’s nothing more horrible in war than being shelled. It’s
a form of torture that the soldier can’t see the end of. Suddenly he’s afraid of
being buried alive... The man stays put in

his hole, helplessly waiting for, hoping for,
a miracle.” Although soldiers then, as now, lived under
conditions, it's difficult to imagine, there was more than even the threat of death to
distress them. According to German officer Ernst Jünger, it was not “danger, however
extreme … that depresses the spirit of men, so much as over-fatigue and wretched conditions.”
And for most soldiers, especially the British and French, the pay for their efforts was
pitiful. So why did they even keep fighting? Duty, nationalism, loyalty to comrades, and
fear of being shot for desertion all played a role. But so did alcohol. As one British medical
officer said: “Had it not been for the rum ration, I do not think we should have won
the war.” Ernst Jünger also remarked on the propensity of soldiers to drink their
troubles away: “Though ten out of twelve

had fallen. Still, the last two, as sure as
death, were to be found on the first evening of rest over the bottle, drinking a silent
health to their dead ‘companions.’ Oh, it’s time for the open letter? Whew!
An open letter to alcohol. I wonder what’s in today’s secret compartment. Oh, shocking, it’s a golf club. And an actual
disco golf ball made by a crash course fan! Dear Alcohol - oh, that’s...
Like disease, you’ve been a key figure in human history, despite not actually being
a person, and for millennia, you’ve played an important role in war, often helping soldiers
do their duty, often distracting them from it. But here’s the thing, alcohol, in my experience,
which is extensive, if you need to be drunk to do something, you should maybe not do the
thing. Unless of course, the thing is golf. Best wishes, John Green.

So what did we take away from the so-called Great
War? Well, not much. Let’s go to the Thought Bubble. The Treaty of Versailles, which ended World
War I, fixed the blame for the war on Germany, which proved ruinous to the German economy
and destructive to its political institutions. And unless you’re really nostalgic for totalitarian
communism, you’ve gotta say that World War I was also a disaster for Russia, because
it facilitated the rise of the Bolsheviks. The Russian Revolution had two phases. In
the first phase, called the February Revolution, because get this, it occurred in February,
army mutinies and civil unrest forced the overthrow of the Romanov dynasty which had
been in power in Russia since, like, forever, to use a proper historian term. The monarchy was replaced by a provisional
government led (eventually) by Alexander Kerensky, which made the terrible decision to keep Russia
in the war, which led to the October Revolution.

so-called because it happened in October, in which Vladimir Lenin and his Bolsheviks took over, famously promising the Russian people “peace, bread, and land.” To which the Russian people responded, “Hey, you just named of our three favorite things.” Lenin’s first big achievement was signing a separate peace with Germany and getting Russia out of the war, which was helpful to him since he needed to fight a civil war that wouldn’t end until 1922. This might’ve helped Germany, too, except the US entered the war on the side of the British and the French. Which led to another outcome of the war: increased geopolitical influence for the U.S. The U.S. was already becoming a major economic power, and being able to avoid the destruction and loss of manpower associated with World War I certainly didn’t hurt. The war helped catapult the U.S. from being a debtor nation to a creditor one, and Wilson’s leading

role in the negotiations at Versailles – even though he actually didn’t get what he wanted – made America a big player on the world stage for the first time. Thanks, Thought Bubble. So just so we don’t get completely Eurocentric, another major outcome of the war was the end of the Ottoman Empire and the emergence of the nation-state of Turkey. The rest of the world saw some change too, but not much for the better. In Africa, Britain took Germany’s colonies, and even though Indians fought and died in a higher percentage than Americans in World War I, India didn’t gain any real autonomy. All these terrible outcomes led to a general sense of disappointment in literary circles. And this feeling of pointlessness and cynicism was expressed by the writers of the “lost generation.” It was a war full of loss: Millions of people were lost. Traditional ideals of war’s nobility and heroism were lost as well. I mean, what is heroism when

you’re just sitting in a trench, waiting
to be blown up? And after World War I, war might be necessary,
but it would never again be glorious. We see this shift in the writing and art that emerged
from the Great War as artists transitioned from romanticism to modernism. Think of Hemingway’s
The Sun Also Rises, which is about a men rendered not noble but impotent by war. This dark,
cruel irony here - you go to war to become a man and war takes away the organ often called
“your manhood” - that defined Hemingway’s worldview. And it also defines ours. Thanks for watching. I’ll see you next week. Crash Course is produced and directed by Stan
Muller, our script supervisor is Meredith Danko, our Associate Producer is Danica Johnson.
The show is written by my high school history teacher Raoul Meyer and myself, and our graphics
team is Thought Bubble.

Last week’s phrase of the week was unless you are the Mongols (we brought it back for you). If you’d like to suggest future phrases of the week or guess at this week’s, you can do so in comments, where you can also ask questions that will be answered by our team of historians. Thanks for watching Crash Course, and, as we say in my hometown, Don’t Forget To Be Awesome.

Archdukes, Cynicism, and World War I: Crash Course World History #36

At Crash Course, we believe that high-quality educational videos should be available to everyone for free! Subscribe for weekly videos from our current courses! The Crash Course team has produced more than 50 courses on a wide variety of subjects, ranging from the humanities to sciences and so much more! sciences. We also recently teamed up with Arizona State University to bring you more courses on the Study Hall channel.


CrashCourse

제1차 세계대전은 가장 파괴적인 전쟁은 아니었지만, 냉소와 아이러니를 정상화하며 모든 전쟁을 바꾼 전쟁이었습니다.

프란츠 페르디난트 대공의 암살과 일련의 동맹으로 인해 유럽의 주요 강대국들은 동원과 선전 포고를 피할 수 있는 많은 기회에도 불구하고 1914년 8월 4일까지 서로 전쟁을 벌이게 되었습니다.

이 전쟁은 궁극적으로 제2차 세계대전으로 이어진 사회적, 경제적 상황의 발판이 되었습니다.

동맹의 그물망, 전쟁의 영광에 대한 믿음, '우리' 대 '그들'이라는 문화적 관념이 1차 세계대전을 이끈 주요 요인이었습니다.

전쟁은 서부 전선에서 잔인한 참호전이 특징이었지만 특히 동부 전선과 오스만과의 전투에서 공세적인 움직임도 특징적이었죠.

제1차 세계대전은 전 세계에 영향을 미쳤으며, 다양한 국가의 전투원이 참여했고 민족주의 운동이 부상하는 데 기여했습니다.

전쟁은 엄청나게 파괴적이었으며, 주로 질병으로 인해 수백만 명의 군인과 민간인이 목숨을 잃었습니다.

제1차 세계대전의 파괴적인 영향

제1차 세계대전의 높은 사망률은 경미한 부상으로 인한 괴저, 치명적인 인플루엔자 유행, 신기술과 낡은 전술의 결합으로 인해 발생했습니다.

전쟁에서 처음으로 사용된 기관총과 철조망은 가장 파괴적인 기술로 입증되어 대량 사상자를 발생시켰습니다.

전쟁은 전투에 대한 낭만적인 생각에도 불구하고 포격에 대한 끊임없는 공포가 지배하는 화려하지 않고 두려운 참호 생활이 특징이었습니다.

제1차 세계대전에서 알코올이 병사들에게 미친 영향

술은 병사들이 전쟁의 고통과 피로에 지친 상황을 극복하는 데 중요한 역할을 했으며, 많은 병사들이 술로 고충을 달래기도 했습니다.

1차 대전은 또한 독일과 러시아의 경제와 정치 제도에 치명적인 영향을 미쳤고, 궁극적으로 볼셰비키의 부상에 기여했습니다.

전쟁을 종식시킨 베르사유 조약은 독일에 책임을 묻고 국가에 파멸적인 결과를 가져왔습니다.

제1차 세계대전은 레닌이 러시아에서 권력을 장악하고 미국의 지정학적 영향력이 커지는 계기가 되었습니다.

또한 전쟁은 오스만 제국의 종식과 터키가 국민 국가로 부상하는 계기가 되었습니다.

또한 전쟁은 '잃어버린 세대'의 작가들에게 실망과 냉소주의를 불러일으켰습니다.

제1차 세계대전 이후 낭만주의에서 모더니즘으로의 전환

헤밍웨이의 <태양은 떠오른다>와 같은 작품에서 볼 수 있듯이 제1차 세계대전은 예술과 문학에서 낭만주의에서 모더니즘으로 전환하는 계기가 되었습니다.

헤밍웨이가 묘사한 남성성에 대한 전쟁의 영향은 전후의 환멸을 반영했습니다.

모더니즘으로의 전환은 전쟁의 어둡고 잔인한 아이러니에 대한 반응이었으며, 이전의 전쟁 미화에 도전하는 것이었습니다.