Name a figure associated with World War I

In My Humble Opinion
1

You know that show Family Feud? Imagine this is one of the questions, one asked to you in the survey and one in the show, so what you’d say and what you think the majority of people would say.

I’m trying to find out if there’s any figures in WWI who comes close to matching the role of Hitler in WWII, as someone who springs instantly to mind when the conflict is brought up.

I’m been obsessively watching the videos on the The Great War channel on YouTube, which covers the war week by week exactly 100 years on, so right now I think of Austrian Chief of Staff Conrad ‘zany scheme’ von Hotzendorf and the Italian Luigi ‘Zapp Brannigan’ Cadorna.

2

Billy Bishop, and the Kaiser.

3

Archduke Ferdinand.

4

If somebody sprung this question to me out of the blue (the shorter version in the title) I’d probably answer Hitler for WWI as well. :stuck_out_tongue:

5

Manfred von Richthofen, aka The Red Baron.

6

For me, the two most important figures in the war:

Gavrillo Princip – for obvious reasons
General Joseph Gallieni – organized the Miracle of the Marne.

For most people:

Huh?

7

Before reading any answers, I thought of the Kaiser and Franz Ferdinand.

As someone who is familiar with WWI, but far from an expert, I would say other possible answers are Von Moltke, Pershing (for Americans), Clemenceau, Joffre.

8

The first name that leapt to my mind was John Monash, but that’d be because I’m Australian and a history buff, and Australians in WW1 is one of my special subjects.

9

My answer would be Pershing.

Most people would say, “World War I? Was that the one with Hitler, or was he in Viet Nam?”

10

Franz Ferdinand, Gavrilo Princip, General Pershing.

Those are the names that come to my mind immediately, Family Feud style, when I read the subject question.

11

Eddie Rickenbacker
Douglas MacArthur

In addition to the names others have already mentioned: Kaiser Wilhelm, Von Richtofen, Pershing, Franz Ferdinand.

(Yes, I know Douglas MacArthur was of no great significance to WWI, but I went to the MacArthur museum and it had a lot of info about his WWI unit, so the two are linked in my mind.)

12

On lightning round: Kaiser Wilhelm, Franz Ferdinand, Von Richthofen, Pershing, Sgt. York, Gen. Foch, Rickenbacker

I’d believe Von Richthofen (as the Red Baron) may be probably the most widely known WW1 “celebrity”.

13

I guess I’m more of a military history guy, because I thought of Pershing, Haig, Petain, Hindenburg, Ludendorff, Falkenhayn and Foch.

14

Erich Maria Remarque

15

Enver Pasha. Hey, the guy even had a mustache!

16

Funny, I was just thinking about this. Bear with me for a moment, if you will, while I ramble…

You could certainly mention lots of names. Princip, the Kaiser, Clemenceau, Lloyd George, Hindenburg, Ludendorff, Petain. Douglas Haig, Churchill, von Falkenhayn, Snoopy… well, and so forth. And the deeper you go, the more names you’ll be able to drop.

But it’s true, and worth noting, that many people can’t think of any right off the bat, unless they’re at least somewhat knowledgeable on the subject. And for once, it’s not just because people are stupid or clueless. Or at least I don’t think so. I think it has to do with the particular character of WWI.

There’s an old philosophical dichotomy at work in how we think about history: “Great Man theory” vs “trends and forces”. I suppose y’all know what I mean here, but anyway:

The “Great Man theory” is the idea that the course of history is directed by the actions of extraordinary human individuals. Like Alexander, Napoleon or Hitler, to mention a few of the most obvious ones. Contrasting with this, the “trends and forces” idea says the opposite: History is the product of broad, sweeping, society-wide systems and patterns, and the individual is just swept away on this “wave” of impersonal historical trends.

You can argue all day about which is correct. In practice, it’s probably a bit of both. Although I think it’s fair to say that the “Great Men” tend to get the most press. It’s easier to think about history like that, and it makes for better narrative.

But WWI strikes me as an episode in history where the “trends and forces” concept really puts on its party hat and has a chance to show off. WWI just eats any potential “great men”. No one has a clue how to fight that war, everyone looks confused, lost, and little more than slaves to the broad sweep of events. It’s like the war has a will of its own.

I don’t think it’s because the men of this period are particularly second-rate. Stick them in a different war, and they might shine. Heck, that’s not even hypothetical: It happened with Churchill. It’s just that WWI is this monster of impersonal forces, and it overshadows and outwits all of them.

And there’s something terrifying about it, I think. Another attractive feature of the “Great Man theory” is that it’s, frankly, more comforting. If Great Men control history, it means that we humans, as individuals, are in charge. But if it’s all impersonal forces, beyond our control… well, that’s a lot more scary. I think that’s a big part of what makes WWI feel so particularly nightmarish, even compared to the objectively more deadly WWII.

Cburchill talks about it somewhere, although I can’t find the quote now (any help is appreciated), about how men lost control of the war, and forces took over.

Anyway. I now return you to you regularly scheduled name-listing thread.

17

Off the top of my head, I thought of Kaiser Wilhelm and Field Marshall Haig (I looked up the spelling after assuming it was “Hague”). I should have thought of the Red Baron but I didn’t (and I’m not sure if I could have recalled his name).

18

Archduke Ferdinand was first name I thought of.

19

And Captain Blackadder, of course.

20

Brevet Lieutenant Colonel Dwight D. “Ike” Eisenhower, Captain Harry S. Truman, and Sergeant Alvin C. York.