What kind of material success and political progress the first decade of the Twentieth century brought to Europeans - Essay Example

1. What kind of attitude do you think that Europe’s high levels of material success and political progress the first decade of the Twentieth century brought to Europeans? Pre-world war 1 Europe was characterized by power, wealth and control over the whole world. Britain during this era was the undisputed superpower, similar to the United States role in modern times. Britain and other European countries controlled the seas and had numerous colonies throughout the world. This dominance of Britain was, however, being disputed by Germany. Germany, at the time, was growing economically and in military power. By establishing colonies all over the world and other economically successful pursuits, European powers were wealthy and prosperous. This coupled with militarism, economic alliances, imperialism and nationalism characterized this era that heralded the First World War. 2. What think kind of underlying tensions existed in the continent during this period? The first decade of the twentieth century was a very tumultuous period in European history. Prior to the First World War, that was to take place shortly after this decade, European powers had succumbed to several disputes. First there was the Franco-Prussia war of 1870 which led to the unification of the Germans in 1871. The war saw a shift of power in Europe with the Prussians basking in the success of their military endeavors. After the war, German sought to secure its place among Europe’s elite in terms of power and military strength. This shift in power unsettled Britain, which begun to seek alliances with other European countries. As Germany increased its naval power to rival that of Britain, Britain allied with France to balance power in Europe. Britain also allied itself with Japan as Germany opened diplomatic ties with Austria-Hungary and Italy. These alliances increased tensions in the Europe as the fight for military power ensued in the continent. 3. How did the arts of the period reflect these tensions? Art in pre-world war Europe began evolving as it embraced modernism that was rife during this period. The tensions between European countries were mostly due to the introduction of modernism in Europe. Artists were challenging the traditional role and production of art that thrived prior to this period. Artists were adapting methods such as cubism, fauvism, expressionism and futurism to capture the rapidly evolving world during this era. 4. Why do you think many people in the first decade of the twentieth century expected a war in the near future? Society in the decade prior to the First World War expected a war due to the diplomatic tensions between European countries during this era. The Bosnian crisis and the First Balkan war preceded the First World War. European powers at the time did not prevent these wars from occurring, and others like Germany supported the wars. The plans of increasing Germany military and naval power together with the reconstruction of Russia’s and Britain’s military were all signs of future war during this era. Rapid power shifts in the late 19th century primed Europe and the world for a power struggle through war. 5. What were Germany’s goals in the First World War? Germany’s objective during the First World War was to increase its influence in the world. Germany had lost in the scramble of colonies and wanted to re-establish itself among Europe’s elite. The First World War presented an opportunity to knock off France and Britain from their positions and gain additional territory and colonies. 6. What is the Fischer Thesis, and how does it explain the beginning of the First World War? The Fischer thesis is Fritz Fischer’s explanation on the cause of the First World War. Fritz adopted a different perspective on the causes of this war unlike other historians in his time. According to him, Germany’s imperialism was the cause of the war and its ambition of becoming a world power. Fischer identified parallels between imperial Germany prior to the First World War and the Nazi Germany of the Second World War. 7. What historical idea does the Fischer thesis aspire to replace, and why is this controversial? Fischer, in his thesis, aimed to replace the idea of the role of Germany in the First World War. Prior to his thesis, historians were content in laying the blame of the war on Russia and Austria. His take on the war did not augur well with German historians as Fischer laid the blame on Germany. Germany, according to him, adopted aggressive objectives whose aims were to establish the country as a world power. 8. If we accept the Fischer thesis, what are the implications of this in considering the post war settlement in Germany? Fischer’s take on the First World War placed all the guilt of the war on Germany and contradicted the country’s view of the war. The country, shortly after the war, was forced to sign the one-sided treaty known as the Versailles treaty which aimed at weakening the military and economic strength of Germany. Fischer’s thesis concedes to the blame placed on Germany by the international community concerning the causes of the First World War. 9. Why do you think Germans in particular are so reluctant to accept this work by a leading German historian? Fischer’s thesis placed the blame of the First World War on Germany contrary to many Germans’ point of view. Many Germans regard his work as controversial to say the least. For this reason, Fischer’s thesis was never accepted by Germans. 10. Broadly speaking, what was the impact of the Russian Revolution and its ensuing Civil war on Eastern and Central Europe in 1918 through 1924? The Russian revolution of 1917 is regarded by many as the last phase of the First World War. This revolution saw Russia removed from the War and its political landscape changed. The civil war transformed the Russian empire from a monarchy to a communist state. This shift in government structures was expected due to the gradual weakening of the monarchy prior to First World War. 11. Why did the Western allies intervene in the Russian Civil War? The Western allies intervened in the Russian Civil War due to several reasons. First, Russia became a communist state and secondly Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litivsk with Germany which ended the War on Russia’s Eastern Front. 12. What kind of order did the Paris Peace negotiations of 1919 attempt to establish in Eastern Europe? The Paris Peace negotiation of 1919 sought to establish a peaceful world order as the world learnt from the First World War. The War had led to the loss of many lives and the victors of the World War sought to prevent another war from happening in the future. 13. What two ideals were in competition in the new states of this region? Why did neither succeed? The First World War saw the rise of liberalism and neo-conservatism in Europe. These two ideals were Europe’s way of preventing future war. Liberalism promoted the balance of power in continental Europe while neo-conservatism sought to establish universal values all across Europe such as democracy and human rights. The two ideals never took root in Europe due to the reparations of the Versailles treaty of 1919 which constrained the power of Germany. The successful establishment of communism in Russia also prevented the ideals from being implemented in the continent. 14. What new kinds of societies were developing in Italy and Russia in the late 1920’s and early 1930’s? The late 1920s and early 1930s saw the rise of fascism in Italy and the socialism in Russia 15. How were they different from the liberal democratic societies of the West? (In both cases be sure to give specific examples Fascism differs greatly from democratic societies because of the concentration of power in the two societies. Fascism transfers all power to one person, known as the dictator, which in Italy’s case of Bennito Mussolini. Democracy, on the other hand, refers to a government made for the people and ran by the people. Furthermore, in fascism there is a class regarded as superior to the others while in democracy all classes are equal in the government’s eyes. Socialism, also known as communism and liberal democratic societies differ greatly. In socialism, the government assumes control over all capital in the state while in democracy the capital is in the hands of the population. Moreover, communism is characterized by a one-party state that rules with no objections from the people. Democracy, however, is ruled by officials elected by the people to rule on their behalf. 16. How did Mussolini and Stalin reorganize the economies of their nations? Italy, despite being part of the Allied Forces, became a poor country after the First World War. Inflation, debt and economic depression characterized post-war Italy. Benito Mussolini, with his Fascist ideologies sought to modernize Italy’s economy and adapt the economy to its lack of resources. He advocated for capitalism in Italy that served the government and forged the union between all members of the economy. Joseph Stalin’s economic reform sought to industrialize Russia’s economy. His vision was to convert Russia into an economic world power with his Five Year Plan. Through socialism ideals, he enforced the government’s economic control over investment and production in the state. He implemented collective agriculture from the previous privatized agriculture practice. Despite the effect socialism had on individual citizens, it benefited the country in becoming a European economic heavyweight in a matter of years. 17. What was the effect of the Depression on the economy of Europe, and why did it make these new societies more attractive? The Great Depression in Europe caused human suffering throughout this continent. The standards of living of people decreased rapidly and the unemployment levels increased during this time. International trade during this tumultuous period halted with countries like Germany deep in debts. Russia in the meantime was experiencing rapid economic growth as it had experienced 400% percent growth in the wake of the Great Depression. This increase in growth while other economic structures were dilapidating made the Russian economy attractive. Russia’s success led to the adoption of socialism-like policies by other European countries and the abandoning of democracy which was blamed for the Great Depression. Read More