Propaganda: Appeasement and Surrender

Given the number of references to WW2 by the Bush administration during the Iraq war, you would think they actually knew something about it. Instead all they knew was tired old propaganda. WW2 propaganda now passes for history, and apparently we "learn from history" in how to deal with the middle east. Some of the worst mistakes in the Iraq war can easily be traced back to a weak understanding of how WW2 really went. If we are ever going to learn from history, we need to learn from real history and not propaganda passed off as history. For example, if Paul Bremer had known a bit more about real WW2 history, instead of movies and mythology, he would not have fired the Iraqi army and all the Baath party functionaries.

The purpose of war propaganda is to stir up hate against the enemy, to make the enemy look cowardly and to make your own side look courageous in the face of overwhelming opposition. And in this case, some propaganda was also needed by the Allies to get more support. The best way to get more support is to get the enemy to overreact and do something that you can use in your propaganda to illustrate how evil they are. So in light of the goals, let's deconstruct some of the WW2 propaganda.

Two minor points to clear up. Neville Chamberlain (known today as the appeasement guy) was the Prime Minister of Britain who declared war on Germany, not Churchill. And Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way round. However Chamberlain resigned under intense criticism for having been duped by Hitler, and was replaced by a coalition government under Churchill without a general election.

Much of the British WW2 propaganda has been written up into history by now, which is one of the perks of winning a war. The British history books note that the French surrendered to the Germans, they also tell of the battle of Dunkirk, where the British forces retreated to the beaches, and through some miracle and a tremendous amount of courage, a fleet of small British pleasure craft sailed across the channel to pick up the last of the British forces and take them home.

Although the history books are faultless when it comes to historical facts, they still give false impressions of the conduct of the war. Reading more carefully, and really looking at the dates of the different events, can give you a different version. And you probably should do that after reading the account below, which I feel is closer to the truth.

This is a version without the pro-Churchill spin. It is a historical fact that the British started heading to Dunkirk before the French surrendered. The move was ordered by Churchill when he came to the conclusion that the French were heading for a military disaster. This was after careful consideration of the losses so far, the reserve strength of the French, and talking to the French Prime Minister, who personally thought the French were done (although not all the French felt that way, but lack of leadership is serious). Churchill made to decision to evacuate unilaterally. The actual evacuation by sea began the 26th of May. The departure of the British Expeditionary force was a factor in the French deciding to give up, not the other way round. Some British soldiers remained and there was another evacuation after Dunkirk.

On June 10th, 1940 Italy joined in against France. Mussolini only needed "a few thousand dead so that I can sit at the peace conference as a man who has fought." This lets you know what politicians think of dead soldiers: the more dead, the more credibility, and better propaganda. The French actually surrendered twelve days later on June 22.

Churchill's next aim was getting America into the war. Although Roosevelt and some other Democrats might have been willing, there was strong Republican opposition to the war. The Republicans saw the Communists under Stalin as the real threat, and hoped that Hitler would attack the Soviets first, if America stayed out of the war. This is what actually happened when America remained neutral even after the bombing of Britain.

Churchill had predicted all through the nineteen thirties that the Germans would bomb British cities in the next war, due to advances in aviation. After France surrendered, Churchill's best hope was that the Americans would join the British, if the Germans bombed British cities. But at first, the Germans were reluctant to bomb British cities and some (arguably) stray bombs landed on civilian targets. Churchill responded to the stray bombs by a deliberate bombing strike on German civilians, which resulted in Hitler going for an all out assault bombing London, and then other British cities. Although this overreaction gave Churchill the propaganda he wanted, America still did not join the war. The Germans then had a chance to turn their attention to Russia, and then Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, and you know the rest of the story. Or do you do?