|← Internship Program||Rewards in Education →|
The main purpose of this paper will be to answer several questions relating to several historic events that happened in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. Otto Von Bismarck is one of the greatest Germany historians and statesman, therefore the first question in this paper is how did Bismarck successfully manage German unification? In addition to that, the paper will discuss how did this (German unification) compare with Italian unification? The second question that the question will answer is, in what ways did 19th century imperialism reflect the growing sense of nationalism and who led the way in imperialist claims? The negative effects of the World War I took years and years before they were forgotten, it is important to note that some of these effects were "carried" to World War II and therefore the third question to be addressed in the paper is trace the connections between the remnants of World War I and the beginnings of World War II and how important a part did the great depression play?
The fourth question in the paper is related to the cold war, there are different nations that were involved in the war and it was believed that the Cold War was often predicated on distrust and paranoia. To answer the question, the paper will cite key events where perceptions played a significant part in the widening of the Cold War. It will include in discussions on the influence the Cold War had on non-Western worlds. The last question in this paper still focuses on the Cold War and the questions is in what ways did Western life change during the Cold War? What elements of that time can still be felt today? To be able to successfully answer the above questions, the paper will use relevant supporting sources.
How did Bismarck successfully manage German unification? How did this compare with Italian unification?
One of the leadership skills displayed by Otto Van Bismarck who served as a chancellor of Prussia and Germany was that he was diplomatic and well conversant with the foreign policies (Graham). Despite his diplomatic and excellent leadership skills, Bismarck used some cunning force against German opponents as a way of unifying the nation. During the Schleswig Holstein war, Bismarck took advantage of the situation to pit Prussia against the Danes. The reason for this is that he wanted to gain favor from German nationalist and liberals back at home. The next step in the unification process is that Bismarck had to get rid of Austria, this confrontation led to the signing of The Treaty of Prague which expelled Austria from the German Confederation. The last "obstacle" that Bismarck had to deal with in his unification effort was to get rid of France. Since he couldn't get in war with France he applied his diplomatic skills by ensuring that he collided France and other nations hence emerging victorious.
According to Nosotro, the main difference between the Germany and Italy unifications is the methods used to foster the unification and the reason behind it. In Italy, the force behind the unification was rebellion and use armed force by the Italians towards their neighbors. This left them with no option but to unite whereas in Germany, a more diplomatic approach was used to unite the nation.
In what ways did 19th century imperialism reflect the growing sense of nationalism? Who led the way in imperialist claims?
Katz has observed that, globalization and economic growth and development are some of the main reasons that led to the rise of imperialism in many nations around the world. This meant that nations that had an upper hand in terms of economic prosperity and military power muscled their way into the territory of the weaker nations. In addition to that, there was a lot of nepotism, racial and religious discrimination in the various states and this depended on the government of the day. It is because of this oppression that the states that felt oppressed joined forces are rebelled against the government of the day (Boorstin). This led to nationalism. According to Chimes, for a nation to be considered imperialist, it was required to exhibit exemplary economic, political and military power; the United States of America was such a nation. In addition to that, Chimes has observed that from the onset of the 19th century, most debates that the United States of America were focused towards territorial expansion.
Trace the connections between the remnants of World War I and the beginnings of World War II. How important a part did the Depression play?
The build up to World War II can be traced back to a few years after the end of the World War I, for example the Amritsar Massacre of April 1919 in which the British massacred thousands of Indians (Littmann). This is despite the fact that India was a British alley during the World War I and sent troops to support the British forces. This is an example of an event that was "carried forward" to the onset of World War II. After the World War I, the world witnessed the biggest economic crisis in history, the great depression. It is important to note that the depression started at the end of the World War I and lasted to the onset of the World War II. During this period the economies of most nations were in shambles and also the social and political stability of the nations was in despair (Barry). As a result of this, the relationship between nations that participated in World War I was shaky and the tension that was there at the moment played a major role in the eruption of World War II (Dietmar).
The Cold War was often predicated on distrust and paranoia. Cite key events where perceptions played a significant part in the widening of the Cold War. Include in your discussion the influence the Cold War had on non-Western worlds.
According to global security, the main reason as to why the cold war did not erupt into World War III was because of the only super power nations involved in the war; the United Stated of America and the Soviet Union. They were afraid to attack each other because they both had sophisticated nuclear weapons at their disposal and the usage of the weapons at the time could have been disastrous. Kreis states that during the way the United States of America tried to take on the "leadership" of the Western world by joining forces with nations like the United Kingdom, France and Germany. On the other hand the non western nations led by the Soviet Union created alliances with like-minded nations like Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria etc and they set up a "Satellite Nation. The Soviet Union leader at the moment, Stalin used Soviet communism to control half of Europe (non Western world) (Wilde).
In what ways did Western life change during the Cold War? What elements of that time can still be felt today?
According to AFR, one of the major changes that occurred in the western life during the Cold War was an increase in the globalization process. This was mainly in nuclear power arm of the military where the nations involved in the war armed themselves just in case the war broke out. Apart from economic growth that took place in Europe at the time, it can be stated that there was also migration of person from one region to the other in search of safer place to settle and earn a living.
The end result of this is that there was diversity in intercultural relation of the nations involved in the war. This is one main element that is with us in the modern world, where most non Americans have adapted to the American lifestyle and "school of thought", these traits and habits were copied by their fore fathers who interacted with the Americans at the time and vice versa (AFR). The breakup of the Soviet Union into smaller independent nations is also another key component that is still with us and a reminder of the great and feared Union (Wilde).