Western Civilization Unit VI

Published 09 Mar 2017

I agree with your idea that there is no immediate peace at the end of the war. For me, I think that at that time there would still be a lot of unrest. Even if the oppressors have been removed or defeated, the manifestations of oppression would still remain. After the war, Europe remained divided, without anyone to assume the leadership position. There were those recognized by the international community to be the head of a certain area, but when it comes down to the places devastated by war, the people there are still uncertain of who or what to follow. You pointed out that there are a lot of minority clashes, religious intolerance and territorial struggle, and I think this is because they have no clear idea of a leader. Everyone was trying to be one, so eventually, they would clash, and would just stir them away from peace. After the war, the people of Europe needed quite some time to settle first before they were able to say that they attained peace. Treaties and agreements were merely a façade of the devastations brought by war, and these ink-on-paper agreements were not immediately enacted. Resistance and unrest remained, though in a general perspective, it was viewed that the war is over.

There is indeed a change in mentality for the people, though I also wouldn’t classify it as enlightenment, just like what you said. However, I see these changes as steps that people took towards enlightenment. The loosening up of the society towards their views on women is a start towards the way we look at women today. The equality that we have now is a clear manifestation of the enlightenment for me, and I think that in part, it has been triggered by the end of the war. The people are responsible for the changes, though it may have taken a long time, it has still helped shape the society that we live in now.

Did it help you?