How did militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism led up to World War I?
Right i've spent all year answering these questions in huge essays in my History A level, now all that hard work comes into play: Militarism: The Arms Races, with war looming nations were desperate not to be outdone in any area of their military. Germany, France and Russia started to conscript large portions of their male population, this gave their countrymen military experience and a taste of war, suddenly everyone was ready and willing to fight. This conscription and arms build up meant that soon every European state had a huge army at its disposal, these armies were ruining their economies, they had to lose them soon but couldnt just let them go, they were propelled to war in order to destroy their enemies and give them the security they needed to allow disarmament. Germany also began building a large, modernised navy that directly threatened the British, who they were still attempting to secure as an ally at the time, and eventually forced them into the arms of the French, which leads us onto...... Alliances: without alliances WW1 would merely have been a short war between Serbia and Austria-Hungary, the alliance system dragged all of Europe into that insignificant conflict, first Germany and Russia and then the British and French a few days later. It was what made a small war a major world conflict. Imperialism: Again Germany's search for both a colonial and Central European empire put a lot of pressure on the Triple Entente and made a war more likely. They constantly threatened Britiain in order to secure concessions of territory (particularly in Africa and the Pacific), again this only tightened Britain's links with France and added to the Alliance web. Nationalism: This was what started the war and what allowed it to continue for so long. Previously wars had been very short and there had generally been at least a modicum of healthy respect for the enemy in many previous European conflicts. By WW1 the populations of Europe had been assured by their governments propoganda that their enemies were the lowest of the low. It was the hatred of the Germans that made the French want revenge for their occupation of Alsace Lorraine, it was the hatred of the Germans that allowed the British Army to have a sudden surge in recruit numbers in 1914 when it deployed to France and it was that same hatred that compelled the Allies to keep on fighting through the horrors of trench warfare.
Explain the build up of international problems to world war 1?
I'm going to answer your second question first. Bosnia was annexed by Austria-Hungary in 1908, which ticked off Serbia because nationalism was a big deal at the time. The nationalists there hoped to unite the Balkan countries into a single Serbian-speaking territory, but Austria-Hungary's intentions to take over the Balkans directly interfered with the nationalists' goals. When Gavrilo Princip of the Black Hand (Serbian nationalist organization) assassinated the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, Austria-Hungary sought to avenge the death of their crown prince, although some believe this was just an excuse to go to war with Serbia because they were a threat to their imperialist plans. There was also a lot of resentment between the countries. Besides being duty-bound to the alliance system, France also wanted to exact revenge on Germany and recover Alasce-Lorraine which was lost in the Franco-Prussian war. Russia had its eyes on Turkish territory, and saw entering the war as an opportunity to redeem itself after its humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese war. Great Britain, I believe, was trying to run a colonial empire in Africa, and Germany, who was very expansionist and wanted to amass a colonial empire of their own in Europe, was seen as a threat, so GB entered into a naval arms race with Germany. The Ottoman Empire I think just wanted to recover its lands that were lost in the 1912 and 1913 Balkan Wars. The US was actually isolationalist during this perod, until German U-boats began sinking ships that carried American passengers (the 'Lusitania' and the 'Sussex'). Since Germany didn't want to fight the United States, they composed a telegram that is known as the Zimmerman Note, which promised Mexico that if they helped stall the US by invading them, Mexico would get back some of its land that it lost to the US in 1848. Fortunately, this message was intercepted by GB, so Mexico never received it.
What are the effects of World War One in militarism, alliances, imperialism and nationalism?
Military- a LOT of wake-up calls. At the beginning obsolete tactics and primitive developments of techniques and measures such as first-aid and survivability were incredibly disappointing. The biggest difference was merely technological development of new weapons like aircraft and tanks and submarines. Alliances- a lot of political manoeuvrings convinced some countries that alliances with certain nations like the Western Allies were untrustworthy- Italy and Japan in particular were miffed by unfulfilled promises, so in the next war you can guess who they decided to be friends with...in WW1 they were with the Allies. Imperialism and nationalism- self-determination (the concept that if a group wants to govern themselves they have the inherent right to do so) brought significant changes to many countries. The Central Powers were all imperial realms, and at the end they all broke up into small states based on ethnic groups. Problem was, just because a place has a lot of people from a certain ethnicity doesn't mean everyone else are in the same group. A lot of the violence in the Balkans, among other places, is because of this. People were convinced that the only way you can exist is to exist among only co-nationals (Chinese with Chinese)m and made worse by the fact that a lot of bad blood exist between certain groups, like Bosnians and Serbians. The belief that countries should be made according to ethnicity was ironically in itself imposed by states that themselves were ethnically diverse. Worse thing is that this was all done sloppily. A bunch of suits with no education on nationalities simply got a map and redrew the borders, thinking that all Hungarians happen to live (or should live) in a place now labeled Hungary. If there's an lesson to learn from WW1 its to not go around telling people what to do.
How did nationalism and imperialism contribute to the outbreak of World War I?
Great question. Nationalism primarily led to an arms race, and it also gave people a sense that they would win any war, because they were superior. For most of the powerful nations, this nationalism wasn’t built on ethnonationalism to some extent. This was a powerful force, and it led some of the more multinational empires, primarily Austria-Hungry and the Ottomans tonhave internal conflicts and fail. The Germans were especially arrogant, (not for no reason) and had been building war plans they thought would defeat the French very quickly, gain them concessions, and place Germany at center stage. A combination of nationalism, believing they had an inherent cultural right to a navy, and an imperial need for one, led the Germans to build a massive navy they did not need or use effectively. Both forces also led to the arms race that occurred in the years leading up.Imperialism drove greed on all sides. The Germans wanted possessions overseas like the French, British, and even small European nations had. They felt as if they were being intentionally removed from the game as they joined it too late. Other nations wanted tomexpand their empires, or support their smaller zones of control if they were threatened but (tiny Serbia brought Russia into the war, Britain joined because of a treaty they hadn’t with Belgium.)Even worse, nationalism drove the stabbed in the back theory, leading the Germans to bitterness and blaming outsiders like Jews and Communists, for the failure rather than German leadership or the military. This paved the way for World War II. Imperialism led to Britain and France failing to support their promises and essentially colonizing Arab lands that should have been given self determination in some way. This has led to mistrust beteeen the Arab world and then West for decades, and are one of the reasons for so many wars and power struggles in the modern Middle East.
The most important cause of World War One?
I'm not sure but do you think that the Assassination at Sarajevo was the most important cause of world war one? There are other causes like imperialism, political, nationalism and the alliances (triple and entente). Could someone please explain to me these and tell me what they think was the most important cause (not the trigger which in a way was the assassination at Sarajevo)? Thanks!
How was militarism considered a cause of World War I?
Simply put, it was a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts. By 1914, the Germans had curbstomped two other great powers (France and Austria) since 1866 and were still rising rapidly in power. The British saw them as natural rivals and the greatest threat to British global hegemony; the French were still bitter about the Franco-Prussian War and wanted Alsace-Lorraine back; the Austrians were trying to hold together their own empire while expanding their territory and influence in the Balkans, where Russia - who was also quite frightened of Germany - held interest as well.So, the nations that would make up the Entente, frightened of Germany (who, let's be honest, was basically the Central Power while the others played a supporting role), began stockpiling weapons and developing newer, better weapons so that they were ready for the day that they would inevitably have to fight Germany again. The Central Powers saw this and began building up arms and developing technology as well. The Entente saw this and put even more emphasis on arms buildup and weapons research. The Central Powers saw this and escalated their own buildup. The Entente saw THIS and -- well, you get the picture. A natural consequence of all this buildup was a greatly bolstered sense of national pride and emphasis on the military as an indispensable part of state and national identity on all sides, which encouraged even further buildup.Image credit to Mental Floss.The end result was several great powers bristling with sheer destructive power, armed to the teeth with the latest in weapons technology, hoping to be able to strike a knockout blow to the other alliance and emerge victorious relatively quickly.And we all know how well that went.
In what ways did the alliance system cause World War 1?
In short, the alliance system allowed for a large, at scale war to happen. The alliances stipulated mutual support and involvement on the signing parties in case of conflict.While the importance of alliances cannot be understated they were not the primary cause of The Great War. It was the unconditional support of Germany for Austria-Hungary for whatever course of action it would decide concerning the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Austria-Hungary would have never went to war without Germany's support.It is also important to note that the decision for Germany's unconditional support laid solely on the shoulders of Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany. While he tried to change course of his actions when he realized the magnitude of what was about to start it was just too late.The link below presents in an illustrated manner that is easy to follow the large context of the war.World War One, The Road to War
How did imperialism cause WW1? Was imperialism the main cause?
What could an ape do if it was given a machine gun? It will try to understand how the thing it was given could work (how to pull the trigger, aim and shoot) and then, it will use the thing to enslave others. Bottomline - when someone who is not qualified to get something (above his understanding or even requirements), he WILL abuse it. That goes for wealth and power as well.For nearly a thousand years, the West have little contact with the outside civilizations (in the East). The very little contact they did have were through merchants who could tell them tall stories. Westerners lived mostly in Europe (US was occupied by Red Indians). By 1500s, that changed when Europe begin to built ships and navigate the globe in attempt to find more wealth for their growth. By 1800s, they have reached the East (after navigating pass South Africa’s Cape of Good Hope), reaching India and South-East Asia. They found themselves at a region rich in wealth (but ignored its richness in culture and heritage as it has no monetary value). The new Industrial Revolution were born in Europe where the resources from Asia were stolen from their homelands and feed the fires of Industries.And as European countries grew with Industry, what do you think these people will do? The same thing an ape will do with a machine gun - he will try to enslave others.