The understanding of European politics during the latter half of the extended nineteenth century, particularly from 1848 onward to the First World War, is as much about the European political climate as a whole as it is about the key figures within this climate. For example, one cannot fully understand the multitude of independence and nationalist movements in the Balkans during this time without first understanding the outside pressures placed on these movements by the three competing empires of the Russians, Habsburgs, and Ottomans; and only then delving into the multitude of persons whom inspired the individual movements. Likewise, understanding the German situation at this time is just as much about the European picture as a whole, as …show more content…
However, if a more global approach, rather than a biographical one, is taken then it is much easier to see that Germany’s turn to protectionism is by no means unique. In fact, Eric Hobsbawm states that, “Starting with Germany and Italy (textiles) in the late 1870s, protective tariffs became a permanent part of the international economic scene,” and he furthers this point with, “Of all the major industrial countries only Britain held fast to unrestricted free trade, in spite of powerful occasional challenges from protectionists.” Thus, it is clear that protectionism was not uniquely German, and indeed any industrializing economy during this time that still possessed a large agrarian sector was ultimately pushed into protectionism out of necessity. However, although Waller is clear in mentioning that, “although Europe and the world were changing rapidly in 1870, we must not attribute all of these changes to the Franco-Prussian war, which were more modest than sometimes assumed,” this still frames the situation in a German sense; whereas, Hobsbawm is explicitly clear in protectionism being a global trend. On the other hand, Waller’s biographical approach to this history, while limiting understanding of the bigger picture, helps the reader to comprehend the purely German
Germany started out as a divided nation fighting for dominance in Europe. Otto Von Bismarck was able to take this struggling complexity and unify it. During this process Bismarck turned the small country of Prussia into a powerhouse, growing the population from 11 to 18 million. Bismarck sprung from a landlord class and moved his way up the political ladder as realpolitik, realistic Politician. He was a man of simple ideals; he stressed duty, service, order, and the fear of God. These ideals along with manipulative tactics are what lead Bismarck on his journey of the unification of Germany, proving that without Bismarck’s diplomatic efforts between 1871 and 1890 Europe would not be the stabilized continent it is today.
Through the book ‘Europe’s Last Summer’ David Fromkin tackles the issues of pre WWI Europe, and the surrounding political, economic, social, debacles that led paranoid countries to go to arms after nearly a full century of relative peace within the European continent. While Fromkin certainly points his fingers to all the nations of Europe his primary focus lies with Germany and Austria-Hungary. Though he continues to stress throughout much of the book that Kaiser Wilhelm II and Archduke Ferdinand were fervent keepers of the peace within their nations, the fault of the war ultimately could be laid at the feet of their two nations and their constant attempts at war-mongering. He claims the war could have been avoided for the moment, had all the nations of Europe wanted peace, but the two bad eggs of Europe drew them all into an unavoidable general war.
Main protectionist policies include tariffs, quotas, embargos and voluntary export restraints, and Adam Smith’s idea of absolute advantage has been developed further to explain international trade. In recent years, protectionism has become closely related to globalization during which the influences of trades spread almost everywhere, so people insist upon the study of social deformities generated by improper policies on international trade and the task of pointing them out with a view to remedy. There are certainly both economic and political purposes of trade
Many historians argue that the reason for Germany going to war was due to the aggressive behaviour of Germany in the build up to the war. Throughout this essay I will be addressing this issue looking at whether Germany was responsible for the outbreak of a general European war in August 1914. There are many factors which contribute to the outbreak of the war from a short-term trigger such as the assassination of Franz Ferdinand to the long-term annexation aims Germany implemented in the years building up to the war, the most important reason was Germany’s aggressive foreign policy, they had provided
Although the world seemed at peace in the early 1900’s but world’s powerful forces were pushing Europe towards war. These forces included militarism, alliances, imperialism and nationalism.
In order to prove an idea, one must compare it to other countries in order to show its superiority. Heinrich von Treitschke, wrote the “History of Germany in the Nineteenth Century,” which outlined his nationalist ideology. Treitschke, was not only an historian but he was also very involved in politics as he was a member of parliament for thirteen years. The reason why Treitschke wrote his famous document was due to the fact that he wanted show people how to make Germany a superior nation. Furthermore, he wanted to illustrate how Germany
The political/geographic situation in Europe at the beginning of World War I was full of conflict and strife with nations already seeped in rivalry and hatred, bidding for power with military might and seeking to obtain it no matter what the cost or how much human life it would take to attain. Alliances are formed in a amalgamation of shared hatred for equal enemies and desire for power , Europe is abound with chaos. European borders seem to be ever changing like that of a snaking river. Austria-Hungary is full of minorities each vying for its own independence and country. Germany and France have an undying enmity for one another. Russia also hated by the Germans is seeking to protect its interests in the Balkans,while creating alliances with France and England. The continent is as a sleeping volcano waiting to erupt in a violent cataclysm of war and destruction with its epicenter between Serbia and Austria-hungry, pulling each of its respected allies into the First world war. It seems every country has some disposition towards another country over disputes not its own but of its allies. The great powers of Europe came to War after The Archdukes assassination in response to each of its respected allies becoming engulfed in a conflict between the Serbian people and Austrian-hungry nation. With both sides drawings in their alliances made prior to the war initial beginning like a domino effect, reigniting flames on animosity. Germany declaring war on Russia soon after, siding
Chapter 28 Descent into the Abyss: World War I and the Crisis of the European Global Order
For the longest of time, Europe was led and controlled by the same powers, and to add another country into the already delicate mix, one with drive and determination to become a leading power, would inevitably upset powers, and escalate tension to a further extent. One must also take into account that in order to accomplish this goal of becoming a world power, industrialization was imperative. This brought forth wealth to the middle-class and jobs to the poor, increasing incentive to carry out Weltpolitik. Its significance, however, is highlighted through the increasing of tensions. Countries viewed Germany as an obvious threat, since before the Kaiser himself, and the installation of Welpolitik only heightened such worry.
Nationalism and liberalism were two popular political philosophies of the late 19th century. Nationalism is the aspiration of a people with a common language, culture and traditions to be unified. Nationalism grew into a movement after 1815, influenced by literature, music, politics and economic developments between the northern Germany states. By 1848, nationalism was strong among Germans, but the course to unify German would prove to take time.
Prince Otto von Bismarck and Prince Klemens von Metternich can be compared to the dual sides of a German Mark. A German Mark that has sported different faces when repeatedly tossed over the years. After 1871, the Prussian-friendly German historians hailed Bismarck as the national hero, who had united Germany while Metternich was deemed a failure. Then after the loss of the two world wars, the coin sides were flipped and Bismarck was seen as a bloodthirsty power monger while Metternich was hailed as the national hero. The things that lead to the diverse opinion of these two men were their characters, ideological backgrounds, goals and the means by which they reached their goals, their achievements and lastly, their failures. The question of
Otto Von Bismarck was a great leader in the unification of Germany. His skill as a diplomat was unrivalled during his reign as chancellor of Prussia. The mastery he showed in foreign policy was such that he was able to outwit all other powers and make their leaders appear inadequate.
had one of the best education rates to be seen in a long time. Along
German history is seen as a ‘painful issue for thousands of Germans and other Europeans’ . However it has interested many historians over the years into inquiring how and why Hitler came to power and how much of this was to do with the failure of parliamentary democracy in Germany. To fully ascertain to what extent these events have in common and what reasons led to the fall of democracy and rise of the Nazis, each have to be looked at individually. Also it seems beneficial, to be able to evaluate these in the relevant context, to look at the situation in Germany was in prior to 1920.
Leading up to the First World War (WWI) was a series of crises -- Serbian unification efforts, the Ten-Point Ultimatum from Austria to Serbia, the Kruger Telegram, the Dreadnought Race, the Moroccan Crises of 1905 and of 1911, the Balkan Wars, and the Bosnian Crisis -- that generated significant conflict and division among the countries of Europe, all of which seemed to lay the foundation for the start of WWI. With concern for its own power and security in a rapidly changing Europe, Germany set out to undermine the power of as well as the alliances between other European countries. In his book The Sleepwalkers: How Europe went to War in 1914, Christopher Clark points out that, while ‘not one of the great powers has escaped the