As nationalism grew in nineteenth-century Europe, it also changed. In the first half of the century, when nationalists saw conservative monarchical governments as the main obstacle to national self-determination, nationalism was linked to republicanism and liberalism. During the middle of the century, especially in Germany and Italy, nationalism was championed by pragmatic and moderate leaders who believed that hard-headed politics, not romantic gestures and lofty republican ideals, would bring about national unification and independence from foreign rule. By century’s end nationalism was increasingly associated with conservative if not reactionary groups that used it to justify large military outlays, imperialism, and aggressive foreign policies. It also would lure the masses away from socialism and democracy.The German historian Heinrich von Treitschke represents this later link between nationalism and militarism, racism, and authoritarianism. The son of a Prussian general, Treitschke taught history at several universities, including the prestigious University of Berlin. He also was a member of the German representative assembly, the Reichstag, from 1871 to 1884. His best-known work is his seven-volume History of Germany in the Nineteenth Century. In this and his numerous other writings, lectures, and speeches, Treitschke acclaimed militarism, authoritarianism, and war as the path to German greatness (you can read excerpts from this document by clicking here). His views struck a responsive chord among many Germans who feared socialism and democracy and yearned for the day when Germany would be recognized as the world’s most powerful nation.
After you finish reading the document, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: What, according to Treitschke, is the relationship between the state and the individual? Why, according to Treitschke, is monarchy superior to democracy? What qualities of Germans set them apart from other peoples, especially the English and the Jews, according to Treitschke? Early nineteenth-century nationalists believed that all nations had a contribution to make to human progress. What is Treitschke’s view? What, according to Treitschke, is the value of war for a nation? Your thoughts…
14 comments:
the arrogant tone of Treitschke's document is sad. but whats even worse is that this is just one point of view. there were obviously many other germans (and europeans in general) who also thought of themselves to be superior to all, esp Jews., and to mistreat them.
to call the Jewish people worthless and an unnecessary part of society is so wrong. there were so many successful Jewish lawyers and doctors that to say that they were only good for the management of money is incredibly racist. treitschke also says that his people to far more "chivalrous" and "noble" than others, esp the english. he calls them "hypocritical" in reference to their religious committment, "cowardice" in reference to their lack of nobility, and "vulgar" in reference to their culture! he also points out that german kids learn to fight for 'real honor' while english kids go and play their little sports for 'business'.
this german mindset is what propelled the nation to expand as a global power very quickly, and stay that way for the next century. unfortunately, its also what sparked the holocaust.
When the state needs help, the individual must become a part of the whole in order to support the state. He thinks monarchy is better because it unifies the state, but that is only because one person is making decsions for all. He thinks dreaming of peace is only for the weak minded! He is big on war, seems it is a key to nationalism. He thinks the English are cowards, hypocritical, have a money lust, and are vulgur. He think of the Germans of being poor, yet chivalrous. He understands the importance of the Jews in earlier times, but other than that thinks they are useless. He thinks the Germans are superior, it seems, and that war creates nationalism.
The Germans seem to be movin in a much different direction than the rest of Europe. Treitschke thinks the monarchy is superior to a democracy because there is one man who represents the whole country. However the rest of Europe is moving toward democracy and trying to give all people, or at least all men a say in government. He considers war a good thing and that it unifies the people and gives them a common cause bigger that themselves.
I disagree with Treitschkes thoughts on the subject of less powerful country vs. more powerful country. He says that the less powerful country should not exist because they don't have enough to support the people. If anything i think their patriotism would be more because of what they lack. They unlike most powerful countries, are more likely unified because of the things they lack. They work harder, they are less spoiled in riches, they are stronger in that they have more unity and pride. What they lack in material things they will gain in defense and patriotism in the country.
In germany he says the citizens should consider themselves as one of many in the country. not just think about them as the country i guess. Also "The English possess a commercial spirit, a love
of money which has killed every sentiment of
honor and every distinction of right and wrong." is accurate. Money has made people in general corrupt. People become more greedy and keep wanting more and more thinking of only themselves. Most of the poorer people value more in relationships such as family ties and friendship while the spoiled greedy people value material objects which in the long run doesn't last.
His comments about the Jews was harsh. just because they lost their jobs as accountants because someone else can do the job doesn't mean they can't have a place somewhere. He was most likely, judging by what he said, a supporter of antisemitism. He's just views them probably as a threat to his power.
This guy seems to thnk highly of the germans and he insults everyone on the way. Calling Jews worthless is insulting and he also called out the english..calling them having no honor since they don't have fights in the street for honor. And another thing he said was that monarchy was better than a democracy because it brings a nation together faster. And that people would know how great germany was because it is a monarchy. Treitschke's opinion is completely racist and insulting..
wow! you can really tell his cocky attitude with this document, and dang he seems so superior to all those not German! And he also says that peace is only thought of the weak, and even sorta blames the Bible for this thinking. He is extremly hostile to the English, and like many others, to the Jews too! This is sad and truly shows the militarisic like and thinking if the ha "all superior" Germans.
Wow... This Treitschke guy is a real jerk. In the document, he goes on saying how superior Germany is and how they're the idea of a perfect country. He even calls out England and says how much better Germany is. Of course, that's what many Americans do today to all other countries. Quite a number of us think that it can't get any better than the United States. Aside from that, he even goes on to say that smaller countries that are struggling for survival should just give up and let the bigger country take over because they're good-for-nothing's. Same went for the Jewish people. Treitschke says how they were good for making money, even though he had JUST stated how corrupt the English are because of their money, and now that the Aryans have come into play, they don't need the Jews anymore, so they're also referred to as worthless as well, so they should just give up too.
The individual is the state. Like when he was referring to the Emperor as Germany, not a German, but the entire empire. When your state, in a sense brother, needs you, put aside all of your differences and support your state. He believes monarchy is the best way to rule because instead of having many opinions, only one person speaks on behalf of everybody else. Monarchy to him achieves unity and great power. One thing that really stands out about the English that the Germans don't approve is the use of sports as competition. He also talks about how the English love money, while the Germans claim themselves as poor, and are hypocritical: preaching what they practice but not practicing what they preach. And he finds the Jews completely useless, which I found pretty harsh. They were so helpful to the Germans earlier, why turn on them now? The value of war apparently beings honor to a state. Peace is only for the weak (which I find completely weird), so being able to defend yourself and winning wars will gain honor and power, which will lead to nationalism.
in this document, the democracy was the will of the people express the will of the state. a monarch excells any other form of government including achieving unity and power in nation
von treischke's personality radiated in this matter-of-fact statement of matters. he was mocking the jews and english, or at least it seemed that way to me. i think that he was the type of writer who would rather there be "revolutions" as opposed to revolutions. he has a very strong sense of german nationalism, so it seems, and i think that he is trying to unite the germans and make them come together. in essence he's saying that germans are part of the bigger picture and that they need to unite for a common cause. whereas his views towards other societies pale in comparison, literally and figuratively.
he scorns the english for "only wanting first prize," but that's kinda what he wants. he wants germany to be the most powerful, which is also wanting to be the best. of course this adds to arrogance, which creates feelings of superiority and prejudice, as seen in his views of the jewish people and even just other european countries. he also uses the desire to be the best as justification for things like military, and of course in a way or in the future imperialism.
i find it amusing how the german people think that they are the absoulute power in the world. i also find this verry arrogant especially the way that they think they are the very best thing that has happened to the world
This document is very Nationalistic (is that a word? hahah) Treitchke says how everyone must band together when the state is in danger. This document is also an example of the beginning of racial differences (similar to the "White Man's Burden"), even if isn't as direct. He also says that people would have turned out better if they developed under a nationalist state.
He thinks the monarchy is better than other forms of government, because the monarchy alowas for more unification and power within the nation- total nationalism.
I think this document is sort of sad, because it is just one person's view. I think being a successful leader means understanding all types of people, not simply focusing on the group that you belong to. I think that if Treitschke had understood that, some of the tension between races wouldn't have occured
He and Hitler both act as if the Germans should be in ultimate power. He thinks that the English are weak and scared because they want peace. They are very violent and arrogent people.
Sapp.
Post a Comment