Week 4, Monday: Ideologies of Change in Europe (1815-1914): Nationalism Flashcards
- What is nationalism?
How does Blanning distinguish between political and cultural nationalism?
How does Blanning’s explanation of nationalism differ from that of Benedict Anderson
and Ernest Gellner?
Nationalism is a political ideology that emphasizes the interests, culture, and identity of a particular nation or group of people, often advocating for self-determination, sovereignty, and a sense of unity among members of the nation. It can manifest in various forms, influencing political, social, and cultural dynamics.
Blanning’s Distinction Between Political and Cultural Nationalism
Political Nationalism: Blanning characterizes political nationalism as a movement that seeks to establish or maintain the sovereignty and independence of a nation-state. It is often associated with the pursuit of self-governance, territorial integrity, and political rights for a distinct national group. This form of nationalism is typically linked to the idea of a state being defined by its political boundaries, governance, and legal systems.
Cultural Nationalism: In contrast, cultural nationalism emphasizes the shared heritage, language, traditions, and values of a nation. It focuses on the identity and unity of a people based on cultural factors rather than political aspirations. Cultural nationalism often seeks to preserve and promote the unique characteristics and history of a group, independent of state structures or political agendas.
Comparison with Anderson and Gellner
Blanning’s explanation of nationalism differs from those of Benedict Anderson and Ernest Gellner in significant ways:
Benedict Anderson: In his influential work, “Imagined Communities,” Anderson posits that nations are “imagined communities” where people perceive themselves as part of a collective despite not knowing most of their fellow members personally. He argues that print capitalism and the spread of literature and newspapers facilitated the rise of nationalism by creating a shared language and consciousness. This emphasizes the role of cultural and media forms in shaping national identity.
Ernest Gellner: Gellner, in “Nations and Nationalism,” argues that nationalism is a product of modernity, particularly industrialization and the need for a literate workforce. He contends that as societies become more complex and urbanized, the cultural cohesion provided by nationalism becomes essential for social order and unity. Gellner emphasizes the link between nationalism and socioeconomic change, viewing it primarily as a political response to the needs of a modern industrial society.
Summary of Differences
Focus: Blanning’s distinction between political and cultural nationalism highlights the dual nature of nationalism as both a political movement and a cultural identity. In contrast, Anderson focuses on the cultural aspects of nationalism as a shared imagination, while Gellner ties nationalism to the socioeconomic transformations of modernity.
Mechanisms of Nationalism: Blanning emphasizes the practical aspects of political action and cultural preservation. Anderson attributes the emergence of nationalism to the spread of print media, and Gellner links it to the demands of industrial society.
Nature of Nations: Blanning acknowledges the political aspirations tied to nations, whereas Anderson emphasizes the communal identity of nations as imagined entities, and Gellner stresses the functional role of nationalism in modern societies.
These distinctions highlight the complexity of nationalism and its varying interpretations across different scholarly frameworks.
- As of the French Revolution many governments engaged in what is called nationbuilding.
19
a. How was German unification gradually achieved in the period 1862-1871 under
leadership of Prime Minister Bismarck of Prussia?
b. Why did Tsar Alexander II want to modernize Russia? How did Russia try to catch up
with Europe from 1856 to 1907?
a. Gradual Achievement of German Unification (1862-1871)
Leadership of Bismarck: Otto von Bismarck, the Prime Minister of Prussia, played a pivotal role in the unification of Germany between 1862 and 1871 through a series of strategic wars and diplomatic maneuvers.
Realpolitik: Bismarck adopted a pragmatic approach known as Realpolitik, focusing on practical and strategic considerations over ideological beliefs. This allowed him to manipulate situations to achieve his goals of unification.
Wars of Unification:
Danish War (1864): Bismarck formed an alliance with Austria to defeat Denmark and gain control of the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein. This victory bolstered Prussia’s standing in Germany.
Austro-Prussian War (1866): Bismarck used diplomatic tensions to provoke Austria into war. The swift victory by Prussia led to the dissolution of the German Confederation, and Bismarck established the North German Confederation, excluding Austria. This war consolidated Prussian dominance in northern Germany.
Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871): Bismarck manipulated diplomatic tensions with France, leading to a war that united the German states against a common enemy. The Prussian victory rallied the southern German states to join the North German Confederation.
Proclamation of the German Empire: Following the victory over France, the unification was formally completed with the proclamation of the German Empire in January 1871 at the Palace of Versailles. This event marked the culmination of Bismarck’s efforts to unify Germany under Prussian leadership.
b. Tsar Alexander II’s Modernization of Russia
Motivations for Modernization:
Military Weakness: The defeat in the Crimean War (1853-1856) exposed Russia’s military deficiencies and technological lag compared to Western Europe. Alexander II recognized the need for modernization to strengthen the military and secure national interests.
Economic Development: There was a growing realization that economic reforms were necessary to stimulate growth, improve infrastructure, and enhance productivity. Modernization was seen as essential for Russia to compete economically with Western nations.
Social Unrest: The serfdom system was increasingly viewed as an obstacle to progress and a source of social unrest. Alexander II sought to quell dissatisfaction among peasants and the burgeoning middle class by modernizing the economy and society.
Strategies for Catching Up with Europe (1856-1907):
Emancipation of the Serfs (1861): One of Alexander II’s landmark reforms was the emancipation of serfs, which aimed to create a more mobile labor force and stimulate agricultural productivity. However, the reforms were met with mixed results and did not entirely alleviate social tensions.
Industrialization Initiatives: The Russian government actively promoted industrialization by investing in railroads, particularly the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, which facilitated trade and military movement across vast distances.
Educational Reforms: Alexander II initiated educational reforms to promote technical and scientific education, which was necessary for a modern economy and workforce. This included establishing universities and vocational schools.
Westernization Efforts: Russia sought to learn from Western technologies and practices, sending students abroad and inviting foreign experts to assist in modernization efforts.
Economic Reforms: Alexander II implemented financial reforms, including establishing a state bank and introducing a new currency to stabilize the economy and encourage investment.
- What was the role of war in the process of creating a unified German state?
The role of war was crucial in the creation of a unified German state during the 19th century, particularly under the leadership of Otto von Bismarck. The unification process involved three significant wars that strategically altered the political landscape of Germany and laid the groundwork for the establishment of the German Empire in 1871. Here’s an overview of how each war contributed to unification:
- Danish War (1864)
Context: The Danish War was fought between Denmark and the allied forces of Prussia and Austria over the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein.
Role in Unification:
Strengthened Prussia: The successful outcome solidified Prussia’s military reputation and influence in the German states. The victory allowed Prussia to gain control over Schleswig and Holstein.
Austro-Prussian Alliance: This war also served as a precursor for Bismarck’s plans, fostering cooperation between Prussia and Austria, while simultaneously sowing
the seeds for future conflict.
2. Austro-Prussian War (1866)
Context: Bismarck aimed to expel Austria from German affairs and consolidate the northern German states under Prussian leadership. This conflict arose from tensions over the administration of the newly acquired duchies.
Role in Unification:
Prussian Victory: The rapid and decisive victory over Austria demonstrated Prussia’s military superiority and reduced Austrian influence in German politics. The war resulted in the dissolution of the German Confederation.
Formation of the North German Confederation: Following the war, Bismarck established the North German Confederation, which included the northern German states under Prussian control, setting the stage for further unification.
3. Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871)
Context: Bismarck provoked France into declaring war through diplomatic maneuvers, framing it as a conflict against a common enemy to rally the German states together.
Role in Unification:
National Unity: The war galvanized nationalist sentiments across the German states, uniting them against France. Southern German states, which had been hesitant to join a unified Germany, were motivated to ally with the North in the face of external threat.
Victory and Proclamation of the Empire: The swift Prussian victory over France solidified the legitimacy of the Prussian state. The unification was formally completed with the proclamation of the German Empire in January 1871 at the Palace of Versailles, symbolizing the culmination of Bismarck’s efforts and the collective aspirations of the German people for unity.
- The French state also practiced nation building in the nineteenth century.
Discuss the diversity of France in the nineteenth century.
How did the French state try to create a unified nation? Use Tombs in your answer
The nineteenth century was a period of significant diversity in France, characterized by various regional, cultural, and social differences. The French state undertook numerous efforts to create a unified national identity amidst this diversity, particularly in the wake of the French Revolution. Here’s an overview of France’s diversity and the strategies used by the state for nation-building, drawing on insights from Tombs:
Diversity of France in the Nineteenth Century
Regional Diversity:
France consisted of various regions with distinct dialects, traditions, and local identities. For instance, regions like Brittany, Alsace, and Provence had unique languages and customs that differed significantly from the central French identity.
Economic disparities also existed, with the industrialized north contrasting sharply with the agrarian south, leading to differing interests and social dynamics.
Cultural and Ethnic Diversity:
France was home to various ethnic groups, including Bretons, Basques, and Occitans, each with its cultural heritage. This cultural plurality often posed challenges to the notion of a singular French identity.
Religious diversity was also evident, with Catholicism as the dominant faith but significant populations of Protestants and Jews contributing to the complex social fabric.
Social Stratification:
The social hierarchy in France was marked by class divisions, with a growing bourgeoisie, an entrenched aristocracy, and a large working-class population emerging during the industrial era. Each class had its interests and perspectives on nationhood.
French State’s Efforts for Nation-Building
To create a unified nation, the French state implemented several strategies throughout the nineteenth century, often reflecting the ideals of the Revolution while also adapting to the changing political landscape:
Language and Education:
Promotion of the French Language: The state promoted the use of the French language as a unifying force. The law of 1881 made primary education free and compulsory, allowing the state to instill a national identity through a common language.
Curriculum Reforms: Schools were designed to teach not only academic subjects but also civic virtues, history, and the importance of the French nation, helping to cultivate a sense of belonging and loyalty among citizens.
Civic Symbols and Rituals:
The state emphasized national symbols, such as the flag, national anthem (La Marseillaise), and commemorations of historical events (e.g., Bastille Day). These symbols aimed to foster a shared identity and pride among the diverse population.
Public ceremonies and monuments were established to commemorate the Revolution and the values of liberty, equality, and fraternity, reinforcing the narrative of a unified nation.
Political Centralization:
The central government sought to reduce regional autonomy and promote uniform governance. This included the administration of local affairs and the legal system, emphasizing the authority of the state over regional identities.
Through laws and policies, such as the decentralization efforts in the late 19th century, the state aimed to standardize administrative practices across the nation.
Cultural Policies:
Censorship and Control of Cultural Expression: The state regulated artistic and cultural expressions to align them with national ideals. Literature, theater, and the visual arts were used as tools to promote a common national narrative.
Expositions Universelles: The organization of international exhibitions, such as the 1855 and 1889 Expositions, showcased French achievements and promoted national pride, encouraging unity through cultural accomplishments.
- What was being French supposed to involve?
What was the attitude of the French conservatives to this vision?
In what areas of France did regional separatism persist? Use Tombs.
Certainly! Here’s a more concise response:
Being French: The Vision of National Identity
Cultural Homogeneity:
Being French involved speaking the French language and embracing the ideals of the Revolution (liberty, equality, fraternity). The state promoted a shared culture while suppressing regional languages and identities.
Civic Participation:
Citizens were expected to engage in politics and education to foster national unity and civic values.
Cultural Symbols:
National symbols like the Tricolor flag and the national anthem were used to reinforce collective identity.
Attitudes of French Conservatives
Defense of Tradition: Conservatives were wary of radical nationalism, valuing traditional institutions like the monarchy and the Church.
Caution Toward Change: They viewed the push for a singular national identity as a threat to regional customs and identities.
Support for Regional Distinctions: Some recognized the importance of regional identities, advocating for their inclusion within the national framework.
Regions of Persistent Regional Separatism
Brittany: Maintained its Celtic heritage and the Breton language despite centralization efforts.
Alsace-Lorraine: A blend of French and German influences, leading to a unique regional identity.
Occitan Regions: Continued to speak Occitan and resist full integration into national identity.
Basque Country: Retained distinct cultural and linguistic identity, straddling the France-Spain border.
In summary, being French was about cultural homogeneity and civic engagement, while conservatives resisted this vision, favoring regional identities. Regions like Brittany and Alsace-Lorraine exemplified persistent separatism despite state efforts.
- Explain: “the separate sphere ideology strengthened” (Hanks, p. 724).
The phrase “the separate sphere ideology strengthened” refers to the reinforcement of distinct roles and expectations for men and women in society during the 19th century. This ideology posited that:
Division of Labor: Men were seen as providers in the public sphere, engaging in work and politics, while women were relegated to the private sphere, responsible for home-making, child-rearing, and maintaining moral standards.
Cultural Reinforcement: Literature, art, and societal norms glorified the domestic role of women, emphasizing virtues like piety, purity, and submissiveness, thus embedding these roles in cultural consciousness.
Social Structure: This ideology contributed to the social hierarchy, supporting the notion that women were inherently suited for domestic life, which in turn limited their opportunities in education and employment.
Political Implications: The separate spheres ideology also played a role in political discourse, justifying the exclusion of women from voting and political participation, as their primary responsibilities were deemed to lie within the home.
In summary, this ideology became increasingly entrenched during the 19th century, shaping gender roles and contributing to the broader societal structure that defined public and private life.
