History is not the Story of Winners and Losers but of Survivors - Thesis Example

Researching and Arguing From an Idea Introduction The research paper provides a research and an argument on the topic, History is not the story of winners and losers but of survivors. The paper provides an argument based on the above stated statement and also from topic on Great War. The research paper relates the idea with outcome of the Great War and provides arguments as to why history should not be considered as just a story of the winners as losers but it should be considered as a story of the survivors. The main reason as why this idea matters to me is because many people regard war as a game of winners and losers but they do not consider the survivors. Those people who win from any war are given more attention than even those who survive to give the accounts of what happened. This idea matters to others since they have to understand that war is not a game of losers or winners, but those who survive are the most important since they will live to give the testimony of what happened. This matter also matters to others since they have to change their mind on the conception they have about history and war, giving example of the Great War. The methodology that I will use in this paper is continuity and change. Thesis statement History is not the story of winners and losers but of survivors. This paper gives an argument why I consider history as a game of survivors, but not the losers nor the winners. The Great War The Great War is also referred as the First World War. The war started in 1914 to 1918, and it was triggered by some greed for power by some European countries (Kenneth 2005). The nations which were involved in the war all had some interest since some were in support of their friend nations while others were in need of territory, great empire and wealth. During the war there was signing of some treaties between some countries where they had to support each other even in times of war. In this war, Russia, Britain and France were one side meaning they were allies and on the other side was Turkey, Australia and Germany. After some time, the war was uncontrollable and it spread out of Europe where the United States in 1917, had to intervene (Keynes 1973). The war began on the 28th of July 1914 when Australia which is also known as Hungary declared war on Serbia. Other countries joined in the war since they had signed some treaties to support each other in times of war. The worst thing of all is that six million people both innocent citizens and the armies lost their lives (Keegan 1980). Argument For one, no one would want or wish what happened the period between 1914 and 1918 to be repeated. This is because; there is no one who enjoys when there is war. When there is war, there is no peace and most of people lose their lives and their properties. The other effect of war is the destruction of a lot of properties and also the economy of the affected countries also deteriorates. In this argument, and according to my own opinion, survivors are the most important people in any war since they live to give a testimony of whatever happened. For example in this case, were it not for the survivors, it would be difficult to trace the root cause of the war between the nations in the First World War; it would also be hard to give each and every account of what happened. My argument in this case is for that history is a story of the survivors and not the losers. Why I support this statement is for one, from the discussion above on the First World War, there was no declaration of the either the winner or the loser. Although in war sometimes there are winners and losers, even the winners lose a lot in that war since also their properties get destructed and their people and citizens also get killed in the war. So even if the people who win in a war are declared the winners, to my opinion, they are also losers. Why I consider them as also losers is because they also lose some people and properties as I have mentioned above, the only difference between them and the losers is that the losers loose more than the winners. The other point is that survivors make the history. This is so since survivors are from both the winning and losing sides. The survivors are the neutral people since they are the combination of the losers and the winners. Therefore, the survivors are left as the history givers and also they provide evidence of what happened. If there were no survivors in the war, for example in this case of the First World War, there would be no generation of those nations and also for the people who lost their lives in the war. Survivors are the ones that the whole story revolve about since incase of any evidence they would be there to give. Their evidence would also be valid since the survivors are made up of those people who lost and those who won in the war. In this case, the sets of “C’s” which apply are continuity and change. For one, there is continuity since the survivors of the war are living evidence that life continued. If there were no survivors in that war either the losers or the winners, there cannot be continuity of any form. The survivors provide continuity, and to prove this, those who survived the war have taken their nations ahead. The survivors also provide continuity to the families, society and the community at large. If there were no survivors in the first place, there would be no people in the affected countries and I don’t think even the countries would be there in the first place. Then on the case of the other C on change, the war gave a room for many changes that occurred as from 1918. The changes in the countries were made possible since there were survivors in that war who were to bring the changes in those nations that were at war. The survivors of the war are the one who brought the changes that are experienced in those countries. If in the first place there were no survivors, I don’t think even there would be any changes to the country. The survivors make it possible for changes to occur since they would also which to take their nations ahead and more especially to where it was before the war or developed more than it was before the war. In addition, in case there were no any survivors in that war, there would be no tangible evidence as what triggered the war. There would be no history since the people who would have given the history would not be there. This means that history would not be there at all. From the definition of the word history, history is the chronological account of what happened in the past, and the people who would give the account of what happened in the past are the survivors. So, in this case, the survivors are the most important people since they give an account of each and every bit and process of the war. From this statement, it is my opinion that history should be regarded as story of the survivors and not for winners and the losers. One point that should be taken is that survivors comprise both the winners and the losers in any war. Conclusion From the discussion above, it is clear to me that the survivors are the most important people in any battle. This is because they make it possible for the families to continue there bring the society back, the community also grows in those specific nations and finally, the whole nation develops. This is so since they comprise both the losers and the winners and they are also the people who are left to give each and every account of what happened. The two sets of Cs which mostly applies in this case as discussed above are continuity and change. Survivors provide continuity and also they bring change in the different nations. The discussion has also provided various reasons as to why survivors are the story makers in history as compared to losers or winners. The discussion has also provided a clear argument as to why survivors should be considered in history as compared to winners or the losers. The survivors, whether the losers or the winners always give the testimony of each and every account on what happened and they are also the source of all information concerning the war from the starting point to the last point. Work Cited Branagh, Kenneth. World War 1 in Color. Burbank, CA: Capital Entertainment Enterprises, 2005. Keegan, Susanne. World War 1. London: Hamlyn, 1980. Print. Milton Keynes .World War 1. United Kingdom :Open University Press, 1973. Print. Read More