Idealistic nonsense. I mean, Americans don't care about history. And they really don't care about WW1. But history classes have to at least pretend to cover WW1. Even long before I was a leftist, the official story taught in schools never made sense to me. The Germans sank the Lusitania, and that made Americans mad. Okay it wasn't great of course, but seems kinda flimsy of a reason by itself. So they add the Zimmerman Telegram. It's pretty silly to take it seriously, but I guess it's taught as this is just something that made even more Americans angry at the Germans?

So the way the history is taught, you are forced to conclude that the US public eventually just got so angry with Germany that they demanded the US enter the way. The problem of course is a.) the US public still wasn't frothing at the mouth angry and I think a majority still didn't want to get involved, and b.) politicians NEVER give a single fuck what the public wants or doesn't want with respect to war. Never have, never will. The idea that US politicians just saw Americans getting angry and thus had no choice but to declare war is ludicrous.

So in steps the REAL reason: if the Allies lost, US investors were gonna lose out big on loans made to support the Allied war effort. Reading Michael Hudson's Super Imperialism, it's just so obvious that that's what was going on. After the war, there was an official hearing or something that determined that was the real cause. But all this gets buried because Americans cannot entertain either historical materialism or the notion that the US gets into wars for less than noble reasons.

Anyways, :amerikkka: , as always.