Why Did Bismarck Use Nationalism Dbq

Nationalism is patriotic feeling, principles, efforts or having pride in your country. nationalism was another big part in world war I. ("DBQ: What Were the Underlying ...", 2010, p. Doc 1) If it was not for the pride in one’s countries, there would be total chaotic war. There was total war because of imperialism also. Because of this soldiers were ready to run towards the front lines and risk his life for his country.

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.

Nationalism, a political or social philosophy in which the prosperity of a nation-state as an existence is considered supreme or more important than anything else. The primary duty and loyalty should be toward the nation-state. The love for one's country often reflected dominance and power as people were able to unite toward common good. Furthermore, republic governments were reestablished a result of Nationalism.

Nationalism can be traced to the nineteenth century, European peoples came to identify strongly with communities they called nations. Members of a nation considered themselves a distinctive people that spoke a common language, observed common customs, inherited common cultural conditions, held common values, and shared common

Nationalism inspires a pride within a group of people that ignites change and strengthens unity. It is what keeps heritages and cultures of nations alive. But what happens when the people advocating Nationalism are trapped within a nation in which they do not desire to be? The Pan-Slavic movement in Eastern Europe in the early 20th Century created a tension between Austria-Hungary and Serbia that culminated in

Nationalism was formed with the idea that a nation is made up of people who are joined together by common language, customs, cultures and history. It held the belief that one should be loyal to the people of their nation, not a king or empire. Nationalists believed that people of a single nationality should unite under a single government. The concept of Nationalism emerged in the French Revolution and was spread to the rest of Europe by Napoleon’s conquests.

The Austrian, Russian, and Ottoman Empires faced such great challenges to control their land because of some key factors such a nationalism and disunity. After Austria had been split in half by Emperor Francis Joseph. Austria and Hungary became two independent states thus, becoming the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Over the course of forty years though, Emperor Francis Joseph would find it hard to control the land of the Austro-Hungarian Empire because of many nationalist disputes that that weakened the empire. After World War I the Austria-Hungary empire broke in many separate nation-states. In the Russian Empire nationalism and disunity helped to weaken and break the 370-year-old Russian Empire. Besides the Russians themselves the Russian empire had ruled over Ukrainians, Poles, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Finns, Jews, Romanians, Georgians, Armenians, Turks, and other smaller nations. With this each country had their own culture. The Romanov dynasty of Russia however, wanted to keep tight control over this diversity. With that, Russification was instituted into the empire forcing all the countries in the empire to adopt the Russian culture. With this you can see how nationalism kept it hard for the Russian Empire to control their land because no country wanted to follow the Russian culture they wanted to follow the culture of their own country. So as nationalistic feelings were strengthened all over the empire after the Russification policy had been instituted Russia was now on its way to disunity and the falling of the empire with the last czar giving up his power in 1917. For the Ottoman Empire one challenge this empire faced to control their land was that of where you stood on the class spectrum. With this in 1856 all people under Ottoman ruling such as the Greeks, Slavs, Arabs, Bulgarians, and Armenians were given equal citizenship. This however, angered angered Turks who were conservative that did want this change to occur resulting in tensions in the

The biggest aim of Russification was to get rid of western influence that Alexander III believed had weakened the nation and reduced its national identity. He attempted to reverse the liberalization and remain true to Russian Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality by making the teaching of the Russian language mandatory throughout the empire, through the patronization of Eastern Orthodoxy, by the destruction of the remnants of German, Polish, and Swedish institutions in the respective provinces, and by weakening Judaism through the persecution of the Jews. He even made a policy called ¨May Laws¨ that banned Jews from inhabiting rural areas and shtetls and limited their job opportunities. Alexander The Great also believed that to be loyal to Russia and the Tsar you had to be a

Alexander I: Alexander I, 1777–1825, czar of Russia (1801–25), son of Paul I (in whose murder he may have taken an indirect part). In the first years of his reign the liberalism of his Swiss tutor, Frédéric César de La Harpe, seemed to influence Alexander. He suppressed the secret police, lifted the ban on foreign travel and books, made attempts to improve the position of the serfs, and began to reform the backward educational system. In 1805, Alexander joined the coalition against Napoleon I, but after the Russian defeats at Austerlitz and Friedland he formed an alliance with Napoleon by the Treaty of Tilsit (1807) and joined Napoleon's Continental System. Alexander requested M. M. Speranski to draw up proposals for a constitution, but adopted only one aspect of Speranski's scheme, an advisory state council, and dismissed him in 1812 to placate the nobility. During this period Russia gained control of Georgia and parts of Transcaucasia as a result of prolonged

Nationalism is way of thinking both political and socially to create a community united by: history, ethnicity, religions, common culture, and language. Numerous effects occurred while establishing a Nationalist community, some effects were a long term impact on Nationalism, and other was short term impacts on Nationalism.

Alexander spent most of his life expanding territories and consolidating his rule over his diverse cultural subjects. Alexander’s conquest overshadowed any plans for unification and racial integration/assimilation because little, or no, effort was spent in an amalgamation between Greeks and non-Greeks. It is evident that the ruler included non-Greeks into his army and administration, but he did so to secure his absolute dominance over his empire. He used the Iranians in the Indian campaigns to fight native tribes. Persians and other non-Greek troops were used to replenish increasing mutinous Greek troops that disagreed with his vision. Rather creating a policy fusion or mixing Greeks and non-Greeks together to create a newly combined superpower, Alexander was practical, and simply was reacting to the various challenges that arose during his

Nationalism is a sense of strong pride and loyalty of ones nation over other nations. This is different from past

Nationalism can be described as a mix, multidimensional morally developed or created concept involving a shared common identification with one's Nation. It is more on politically motivated towards working and maintaining self-governance, or full sovereignty, working towards to a specific land or a territory of historical significance to the group such as land and its belongings. In simple Nationalism is a nation command and lead itself, free from foreign influence, it is the concept of self-rule. Nationalism is further formed towards maintaining and developing a Sovereignty based on shared features such as religion, language, race, culture, or either political goals or a belief in a customary ancestry. So its pride towards nation's achievements, and the concept in world history has shown positive and negative impact, moreover in a political dimension it leads either unification or disintegration.

I see nationalism in many places. For example, people have written songs about their country, like Grammy-award winning best country song “I’m Proud To Be An American”. There are movies like Rocky IV, or Cool Runnings, where the main protagonist is competing for his or her country. There are many people around the world that celebrate their country during the Olympics or their country’s “Day”. For example, America has the Fourth Of July, Canada has Canada Day. There is an American football team named the Patriots, and their logo is a man’s head with a star and the standard American flag colors. People even paint themselves their nation’s colors to show their nationality. There are people that even go as far as fighting for their country in

It is interesting, as Hingley comments, that the reign of Tsar Alexander III was '...in keeping with the tendency for stern, uncomplicated Romanov Tsars to alternate with those of gentler and more elusive temperament.' This illustrates well the situation in Russia at the accession of Tsar Alexander III, and the atmosphere throughout the majority of his reign, that it was almost diametrically opposed to that of his father's This was his reaction to the assassination of his father. Where the Nihilists had attempted to bring a more democratic and liberal governing to Russia in the assassination they had inadvertently brought into rule a Tsar whose approach from the outset of his reign could have not have been more different. Not only this, but the actions of the 'People's Will' had hardened Tsar Alexander III's resolve that any attempts at reform were dangerous and could only affect the stability of the monarchy. He had seen the proof for himself, that the introduction of reform could only entertain criticism and opposition to the Tsarist regime.