1870-1914: Global economy, nationalism and the First World War

Résumé du document

Though Professor Davies was essentially right in his description of a prosperous late 19th century in the wake of the Industrial Revolution which brought major industrial and scientific discoveries, the outbreak of the War in 1914 was not regarded as a surprise. The German state has often been held responsible for the Great War being a young and ambitious state having a rather aggressive foreign policy. In 1918 it was improperly regarded as the trouble-maker (as Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles states).

But a closer look shows that Europe had been preparing for war since the early years of the 20th century. Profound strengths had been at work decades before through the exaltation of nationalisms which drove the peoples apart. At first the idea of a nation was voiced by the elites at the beginning of the 19th century, it then became a matter of masses at the dawn of the First World War. In the European states which had already achieved the Nation-state, public education, the media and the army soon crafted the nationalistic feeling.

This nationalistic exaltation fuelled what Nietzsche called the "will to power" of the greater European states, namely imperialism as a policy reinforcing numerous tensions in the context of a more intense economic and colonial competition. Europe and the world soon became too confined for ambitious powers facing new challengers such as the United-States and Japan.

Extraits

[...] 1870-1914: Global economy, nationalism and the First World War Question: If Norman Davies' description of a prosperous and peaceful late 19th century Europe is accurate, how in your opinion, was it possible for a world war to break out in 1914? Though Professor Davies is essentially right in his description of a prosperous late 19th century in the wake of the Industrial Revolution which brought major industrial and scientific discoveries, the outbreak of the War in 1914 may not be regarded as a surprise. [...]

[...] First and foremost nationalism is the key element of the 19th century; Norman Davies notes that was crystallised by the social and political changes of the nineteenth-century Europe”.[1] Friedrich List wrote in 1841 his National System of Political Economy in which he offers a rather comprehensive definition of nation: “Between the individual and the whole human race there is the nation with its special language and literature, with its own origin and history, with its manners and habits, its laws and institutions ( ) having an intelligence and interest peculiarly its own ( ) able to maintain its independence only by its own strength and proper resources”.[2] Although nationalism, according to Isaiah Berlin, “dominated much of the nineteenth century in Europe” most dominant nineteenth-century thinkers neither recognised its force nor “foresaw its future”.[3] Hence the assumption that nationalism is bound to fuel the engine of conflict. List has to be confronted with Karl Marx to get a better understanding of the debate at stake in 19th Europe. Roman Szporluk published in 1988 Communism and nationalism Karl Marx vs. [...]

[...] A protective system has to be set up by the state to protect national industry from competition with foreign industries until the national industry is strong enough to sustain foreign competition. The main idea behind this being that a nation with an established manufacturing industry reaches highest degree of civilisation, prosperity, political power”.[6] However, according to Marx's view, this doctrine contradicted everything then taking place in the development of society. It was an axiom for Marx that the industrial progress intensified the existing antagonism between the dominant bourgeoisie and the labourers that would soon turn into a violent revolution because history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”.[7] Marx argued that modern society consisted of two classes engaged in an irreconcilable conflict: the ruling class of the bourgeoisie (capitalists) and the exploited class of the proletariat: the industrial workers. [...]

[...] [ ] A war which facilitates the transition from a merely agricultural state to that of an agricultural and manufacturing people, may be regarded as a blessing to a country”.[11] According to List, war finds a rational justification, part of the process of nation-building. Alongside with nationalism, the 19th century was dominated by imperialist logics. List voices a preference for large states in his essay, the logic of his argument therefore would lead to the legitimation of aggressive war against weak states for instance futures colonies, which as, Norman Davies notes, part of the advanced industrial economies”. [...]

[...] The key to success in the struggles for the domination over the world was indeed naval power. The British Empire relied upon the naval strength of the United-Kingdom, hence the decision of the German War minister von Tirpitz to launch a war ships programme: future is on the water, and the greater the number of Germans who get out on the water, the better for According to the Weltpolitik of Wilhelm II, this fleet was supposed to help Germany getting its colonial empire but at that time there were few territories left. [...]