World War 1 Causes

Africa faced aggressive imperialist efforts from the Europeans, including diplomatic pressures as well as military invasions. This push for imperialism by the Europeans into Africa was brought on by economic, political, and social factors. After the collapse of the slave trade and all of its profitability, it made the demand for sources of raw materials something that needed to be acquired. There was also a need to search for investment opportunities, as well as a stable market. This made the economic motives the primary need to push into Africa. However, there was also competition between Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, and Spain to gain power within politics. One way to gain power within this competition was through the acquisition of territories, hence another reason to push for Africa. Socially, due to the

Since there were many nations involved, there were many attributes that led up to imperialism. Firstly, the Europeans wanted economic expansion. Since the industrial revolution had taken place, the Europeans were in need of more natural resources. They also wanted new markets for the sake of selling industrial products. To achieve this they had to look for more places outside of Europe and colonize it.

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.

Between 1870 and 1920, the European nations took the use of imperialism due to economic, political, and social forces to control the less-developed locations of the world. Economical forces used the need for raw materials for a reason to take locations. Social forces such as racism, thinking that themselves, the Europeans were better than whomever they were taking over. Political forces used militarism more often than not to take the less-developed locations of the world. The use of economical, political, and social forces were all important during the rise of imperialism during the 1870s through 1920s due to the humanitarianism (used in both political and social forces), racism, and the market through world trade with the need for militarism.

When asked who started it, many people will turn and point to someone else in the room. But when asked what started World War I people point to many different causes and countries. Little bit of background, World War I started in 1914 and ended in 1918. Many countries in Europe were involved and there were many casualties throughout the war. The one remaining question is what exactly was the underlying cause of World War I? There are three things that could have possibly been the cause of the war: militarism, imperialism, or alliances. These next three paragraphs will discuss, in order from least to most accusable, how they caused the war.

Lastly, politics and fighting for the highest power affected imperialism. “The political impetus derived from the impact of...power struggles [w/in] Europe and competition for preeminence [in Europe], Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, and Spain were competing for power…” (Document R). More power means a country can take control and demand their necessities.“The economic motive is by no means to be dismissed but alongside of it there evidently was another one, not so easy to define but none the less real - the power complex - sheer love of power” (Document M). Along with economics, which is still a big factor, politics and being powerful afflicted conflict over

There were many underlying causes that could have been used to lead up to World War I. World War I had many turning points throughout the war. The war took over a huge piece of land and water for each country involved in the war. There were four main causes that have been believed to be the cause of World War I.

France, England, Belgium, and other countries took large sums of land from Africa in order to become powerful in both land and profit. The objective of this would be to let other European countries know how they were exceeding in land and profit, as a whole country. To exceed better than other countries exhibited who bore the most power. For the Europeans, power was a God-given gift, in which whoever had most power was the best. Which is why countries fought in a vicious manner: for their national pride.

During the 1700’s through the 1900’s empires like France and Britain began to take over land in various continents and turned them into colonies. Although Britain and France saw this as a positive thing, the colonies proved to be difficult to control. Today it is hard to tell if the acquisition of these colonies was more beneficial or detrimental to their respective motherlands. Britain was the first European nation to imperialize. This is because England is an island and was running out of natural resources, and with growing population, there was no way to tell when England would run out of resources. Britain also had the world’s strongest navy. This brought up the idea to imperialize. Some other reasons for imperialism was the desire for

During the late 19th century, many European countries were seeking to gain power, both in Europe and the rest of the world. In doing so, the Europeans colonized many different areas, including India, North America, and quite notably, Africa. This colonization was part of a process known as imperialism, where the various European nations would each colonize territories around the world, and subsequently used the natural resources, and often times people, in these colonies to fund their empire. This would work towards an eventual goal of possible world domination through an aggregation of power. The Europeans also did not want to cede power to their rivals in Europe, as this could lead to their own country getting conquered and thus losing control of Europe and their bid for heightened power and world domination. As a result, they each conquered territory to both earn money and power for themselves, and keep these from ending up in the hands of their rival nations. European imperialism in Africa was thus driven by economic and political forces, due to the fact that European countries wanted to spread their influence, improve their economies by keeping control of their colonies, and prevent other nations from gaining power in a similar manner.

European imperialism on the other hand was for the increase in pride for the involved nations.

Imperialism made countries want to aspire to increase wealth and power by making other territories be under their rule. Countries competed for overseas territories in search of raw materials and market for their goods. It created rivalry in

What is the New Imperialism and what were the cause and effects in the World Wars in order to understand what is the “New Imperialism”, we must first learn and define Imperialism: a policy or practice by which a country increases its power by gaining control over other areas of the world: the effect that a powerful country or group of countries has in changing or influencing the way people live in other, poorer countries. The New Imperialism takes on effects in the late 19th century this is when there is an interest or wanting to gain a imperial territory, Imperialism is also consider to be when there is a desire to control a trading routes and resources in a nation. A perfect example of the New Imperialism is called the "Scramble for Africa", this is when Europe tries to takes control over Africa. In the late 19th century Europe struggle to destabilize and to balance the power that they once had before Italy and Germany became unify.

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

After the First World War (1914-1919), the world was faced with the questions - who was responsible and what was reason for the outbreak of the war. Ultimately it was agreed on the 28 June 1919 that “the Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage” from the First World War. However, there have been many other interpretations on whom and what was responsible for the war. On the one hand, some historians would agree with David Lloyd George’s notion of all “the nations slithered over the brink into the boiling cauldron of war”, however, on the contrary, others would agree with Fischer in arguing that Germany’s aggressive foreign policy was responsible for the First World War. Whether you agree with Lloyd George or Fischer, it is important to understand some of the other possible reasons for the outbreak of the First World War – including the growth of nationalism and imperialism, the alliances within Europe and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Although this essay will argue that Germany’s aggressive foreign policy was responsible for the outbreak of the First World War, it will also illustrate why other historians have argued against that notion.