Final answer:
The organizing principle for writing World War II history could effectively be major battles and outcomes for a comprehensive approach, or world leaders of the period to capture strategic decisions. However, other perspectives might emphasize France's role or the major concentration camps depending on the desired focus and narrative.
Step-by-step explanation:
The most effective organizing principle for writing the history of World War II depends on the scope and purpose of the history being written. If the goal is to understand the conflict in its entirety, focusing on major battles and outcomes might be the most comprehensive approach, as it would include the chronological progress and turning points of the war, such as D-Day, the Battle of Stalingrad, and the Pacific campaigns. Another perspective could be to explore world leaders of the time period, like Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, and Hirohito, to understand the decisions, policies, and national motivations that drove the war forward.
Each organizing principle brings its own perspective and insights into the war. Writing from a French perspective could emphasize France's role in the war, while a study focused on the human cost might center around the major concentration camps. Historians like Adam Tooze and Conrad C. Crane underline moments like Germany's victory in France or the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as decisive, respectively, highlighting the subjective nature of historical narratives. Depending on one's national or cultural viewpoint, different aspects of the war will hold varying degrees of significance, as seen through various historian's perspectives.