To what extent and in what ways did German nationalism change and grow in the years 1890-1914?

Instead of revolutions, much of their reforms came from “above” – from the ruling class. They did not have a party system. The fellowship of being German was depicted in the photograph of Suddeutcher Verlag at the beginning of the World War I in Munich. Germans were very proud to belong to this nation. A particular class of the German people that strongly contributed to the Sonderweg theory were the “elites”. The control of the elites stood in the way of liberal democratization and a truly representative government. The elites included the Junkers, the large agrarian landowners who possessed much power and influence because of their wealth.

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.

In addition to the damaging consequences of the First World War with the requirements of the Treaty of Versailles, certain features of Germany caused the state to be susceptible to the influence of this dangerous ideology. Along with the damage to the national ego as a result of the First World War, Germany had co-existing and conflicting highly modern strands of development forced to integrate with powerful remnants of archaic values and social structures, and had a deeply fractured parliamentary political system, and the weaknesses of this system reflected the social and political differences within the population. This shame and failure after World War I was superimposed onto a modern country which once had an advanced economy, a sophisticated state

Contrast the impact of nationalism in Germany and the Austrian Empire from 1848 to 1914.

The people wanted this new civilian government and this provides a strong basis to the argument that there were drastic revolutionary changes in Germany after world war one. The fundamental; constituent changes have been often called a revolution however some historians would argue that this is a real exaggeration. The Reichstag never really seemed to want to make a massive impact on the events of Germanyfor example; in October 1918 the Reichstag adjourned on 5 October and went into recess until 22 October, when it adjourned again until 9 November. These were hardly the actions of an institution that wanted to shape events decisively.

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

Germany became a unified country in 1871 under the leadership of Otto Von Bismarck. The separate states up until this time were independent, Prussia being the strongest and most influential, followed by Austria. There are several contributing factors to the unification of Germany, the most influential of which being the leadership of Otto Von Bismarck. The three wars that Prussia fought with Denmark, Austria and France also played significant roles in the unification of the German states. Another factor to consider is the increase in support of nationalism around Western Europe at the time, and the changes in German society. Through an evaluation of these factors and relevant sources one can

Nationalism drove change in the world after World War II by resisting foreign interferences which is evident in events such as the End of Mandates and the Soviet Sino-Split as well as Pan-Arabism.

While the religious division of the Prussia Protestant and that of the dominating Austria Catholics was an important factor, the opposition from Austria and the rulers were more important. Nationalism became this progressively intensifying cycle that eventually climaxes into war. Many began to put aside the idealistic ideas of society and began to embrace the realities of society as competitive and combative. Under the calculated guidance of Otto von Bismarck, Germany would finally be on the promising path of unification.

Peter Fritzche’s book, Germans into Nazis, contends that, “Germans became Nazis because they wanted to become Nazis and because the Nazis spoke so well to their interests and inclinations…however, voters did not back Hitler mainly because they share his hatred of the Jews…but because they departed from established political traditions in that they were identified at once with a distinctly popular form of ethnic nationalism and with the basic social reforms most Germans counted on to ensure national well-being.” (8-9) His argument rests on the notion that the Nazis had a vision for Germany that incorporated Germans into a national community, throwing off the restraints of a tired government, and propelled them towards a future that would

The nationalist power-politics in Germany were promoted heavily. There were strong advocates for imperialism who also pushed for advancing Germany's weapon's technology and strong army.

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.

The political and social conditions of Europe before the onset of the World War I were extremely unstable and undergoing a rapid transition that was driven by national interests of different nations living in the region. Nationalism was endorsed to promote patriotism among masses and to achieve political objectives that were in alignment with the national or political interests of countries. As the time passed, the growing influence of imperialism and the ideology of nationalism manifested multifaceted

Bismarck was the man who did the most to unify Germany. It was clear that unification was one of his major objective which he announced in his famous ‘Blood and Iron speech’. I was fascinated by how he managed to unify the so many divided states. Thus, my historical investigation examines the question, to what extent was the Franco-Prussian war Bismarck’s final step to unify Germany? To assess whether the Franco-Prussian war was Bismarck’s final step for unifying the loose net of 39 German states or not, the investigation analyses the previous steps made by Bismarck to unify Germany. It investigates the events between 1962, when Bismarck became Minister president of Prussia and 1971, when Germany became officially unified. The events analyzed are the Danish war, The Prussian Austrian war and the Franco Prussian war.

Since the unification of Germany in the late 19th century, attitudes of nationalism, Prussian militarism and expansionism saturated German society. As one can clearly see in the