Monday, February 27, 2017

Unification in Italy and Germany


Unification in Italy

So, beginning in Italy, we started to discuss some of those who made it onto the list of four important dead  guys . Just to refresh who was on said list we had :
-  Mazzini
- Cavour
-Garibaldi
- Victor Emmanuel
Now given this list :

Which one was most important out of them in the formation of a unified Italy?
  • Based on his actions, it was determined that Cavour proved to be the most important in this process,  becoming a major force in catalyzing the unification under the Sardinian king, Victor Emmanuel. Further, Cavour took advantage of the situation as they were presented to him, as in the later case of Garibaldi, in order to promote his goals.

Cavour

Going off of this last point, how did Cavour take advantage of Garibaldi?
  • Garibaldi was an ardent nationalist who wanted to free the kingdoms of the Two Sicilies using his group of fellow nationalist guerrilla fighters, known as the Red Shirts.
- This group of  Red Shirts are reminiscent of earlier nationalist radical, Mazzini, who employed the use of the il Risorgimento.
  • Even though he promoted a more conservative constitutional monarchy political approach, Cavour secretly aided Garibaldi in his plan of opening up the kingdoms in Sicily. In this way, Cavour saw Garibaldi as an important tool to help get his ideas of breaking the local kingdoms down in favor of a singular state pushed forward.
- As we said, Cavour agreed with the mission, not the means of Garibaldi , but what did this mean?

  • Favoring more diplomatic approaches, Cavour did not particularly like the more aggressive, guerrilla methods that were employed by Garibaldi and his men. 
- Force, however can sometimes do a lot more than lofty political agreements to further a cause.
  • Although this force was a somewhat effective way to tear through kingdoms like Sicily, it ultimately proved problematic when Garibaldi wanted to go on into the Papal States which could incite foreign and domestic problems with leaders of the Catholic church.
  • Almost more alarming to the conservative Cavour was the popular appeal that Garibaldi was gaining among the peasant classes in the areas he traveled through.
- Both issues lead Cavour to organize a plebiscite ,or vote, in the places where Garibaldi conquered.

Why was this so?
  • Garibaldi was gaining a degree of support from the peasant classes. Cavour, although using Garibaldi in his plan for unification, did not want any actual threat to the monarchy that he was trying to extend across Italy. So, by doing this, Cavour prevented any more popular support from  fomenting for Garibaldi and instead instituted a vote for monarchy.
Cavour to Garibaldi

Because of this move, did it make Cavour the same as Metternich?
  •  Although Cavour used a radical nationalist in a way that Metternich may not have, the two men can be seen as similar. In both leaders, there was a fear of radicalism and popular appeal. Neither Cavour nor Metternich aimed to remake society, but rather to establish a traditional form of government in the way of a constitutional monarchy.

Unification in Germany

From the unification efforts in Italy, we turned to those that were happening farther north in the German Confederation.

  • Prior to this time :  nations within the German Confederation tried to unite through economic means  under the Zollverein, an overarching customs trade union.

However, the true force that ultimately did the most to unite the German nationalities was  Otto von Bismarck.
  • Originally from the Prussian aristocratic class, known as the Junkers, Bismarck became the chief minister to the Hohenzollern  monarchy in Germany.

The two things that Bismarck said that united Germany was "blood and iron" rather than revolutions.

What did "blood and iron" stand for?
- Iron = industry of the nation
- Blood = international warfare that could expand and bind the confederation together

Another idea that  Bismarck  was a proponent of was  having "two irons in the fire"
  • Two irons in the fire meant that in case one plan or course of action failed, there would be another one that could easily replace it as another adequate option that he could follow.
Adhering to his own advice, the three most influential steps taken by Bismarck to unify Germany included:

1. War against Denmark
  • Fought over claims by both Denmark and Prussia over the provinces, Schleswig-Holstein
  • The Danish king believed in the legal claims that he had to the provinces, however, with the majority of the population being German , Prussia also firmly held that the lands were theirs.
Looking at this issue, it can be viewed as having a Hitler-like quality where Hitler forcibly took present-day Czechoslovakia using the claim that the citizens wanted to go back to their German heritage and rule.
2. The Austro-Prussian War
3. The Franco-Prussian War

Based on what this information about Bismarck,
                       Was Bismarck a great visionary or a great manipulator?
  • Given his actions until this point, Bismarck is more of a master manipulator than a visionary. While vision might have influenced him, Bismarck employed numerous calculated power plays to achieve the maximum benefit for the growth of his country. Therefore, he used cunning and the art of manipulation in his political position.

Sunday, February 26, 2017

REMEMBER When we had that pop quiz??
and apparently there were right and wrong answers...

Well let's address why the countries were or were not liberal, socialist, and nationalistic
  • In class we mainly focused on nationalism
Who were the only REAL nationalists and why
  • France → it was only actual nation (unified under one ruler with one language, etc.)
Didn't we ALSO say Germany exhibited nationalism??
  • Germany →Since it was inspired by Italian efforts to unite and created customs union (Zollverein) that somewhat united them

This begs a larger question: Why were Italy and Germany so slow to unify??

  • Both:
    • What the city-states thought of each other
    • They were a conglomeration of a bunch of small city-states
  • Why Italy in particular:
    • Renaissance promoted city-state rivalries
      • Each city-state had a level of nationalism in its own areas, NOT as a Nation of Italy
        • Prioritized personal goals 
      • Church → "thorn in side of Italy unification,"
        • Believed that pope shouldn’t have a king

    Now that Italy and Germany are finally seeing the light of nationalism...
    ...HOW do they do it, what's the key to nationalism, it's secret ingredient one may say

    • Common goal (common enemy)

    The Secret Formula for Nationalism was a COMMON ENEMY
    What made nationalism appealing??
    • Nationalism wears many masks which means that it is adaptable to each country cuz it supports the ideals of the country
      • Not dull tool; it can effect anything that you want as long as it's country first


    Math

    JKJKJKJKJKJK let's go back to France

    Why did Napoleon III (Napoleon cubed) get power weren't people afraid after Napoleon I?
    • They were more afraid of socialism and were tired of revolution
      • They wanted a strong ruler to combat both
    Why was Napoleon III special
    • He wore many masksActed socialist, liberal, national, imperial
      • Supported whatever people wanted
        • “A strong leader serves all people”
        • “Public opinion wins the final victory”
    • How does this connect to mass politics?
      • Because he used popular opinion to do stuff
    Politics are the people
    SO as we ask for everyone that shares the same name: Was Napoleon cubed an improvement over Napoleon I?
    Napoleon III being better than Napoleon I
    • Sure
      • Napoleon III → More open to people → improved economy, more jobs
        • Cool with reducing political tensions
        • Created credible public banks (Credit Mobilier) → helped poor people
      • Napoleon I
        • Okay with tensions 
        • Started wars with everyone (we are pretending Napoleon III didn't start wars because we haven't read that far yet)
        • Didn’t care about people because he came back for his own power rather than for France

    What event happened between the Napoleons 1 and 3
    • Industrial Revolution Napoleon III was dealing with a new class created and people were more vocal

    Once again:


    Back to Italy
    4 important people from Italy (the political powers)
    • Mazzini
    • Garibaldi
    • Cavour
    • Victor Emmanuel
    Are any of them similar to Metternich (the Austrian Conservative dude)

    • Nope:
      • Mazzini → radical democratic republican
      • Garibaldi→ radical nationalist
      • Cavour and Emmanuel → pretty liberal with constitution (but they did like stability under monarchy)
    • Metternich might not have thought that these rulers were legitimate

    Tuesday, February 21, 2017


    1.) 3 Kings Who are they and why do they matter?
    • a.) Louis XVIII
      • fat and old / He was Napoleon's successor 
      • The Quadruple Alliance chose Louis because WHY ERIN? Because he was A LEGITIMATE RULER! (Bourbon dynasty)
      • Is he a revolutionary? NO because he continues the constitutional monarchy 
      • Louis XVIII's Constitutional Charter of 1814:
        • Liberal constitution
        • How was it liberal???? Social gains made by middle class in French Revolution were protected, intellectual/artistic freedom was permitted / parliament with UPPER AND LOWER HOUSES CREATED WHOOP WHOOP
    • b.) Charles X
      • He reigns because Louis died 
      • His reign ==> 1824-1830 
      • He was a reactionary --> step further than conservatism 
        • Charles X wanted to return to pre-1789 ideologies/government #BRINGBACKABSOLUTISM1824 
      • Charles HATES CHANGE 
      • Revolution 1830: Charles wants to bolster French nationalism/gain popular support of the French people through acquiring Muslim Algeria
        • WHY DOES THIS BOLSTER NATIONALISM? BECAUSE IT IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF "WE VS. THEY" 
      • The conquest of Algeria marked the rebirth of French colonial expansion 
      • HOW COULD THIS POSSIBLY GO WRONG?!?!??!!!??!?!
        • well Charles X messes everything up when he repudiates the Constitutional Charter in an attempted coup in July 1830 
        • "I'm going to be super conservative and rid of this liberal charter" - Lily imitating Charles #accurate 
      • RESULTS: Charles flees and PHILIPPE SLIDES INTO FRANCE'S DM'S
    • c.) Louis Philippe 
      • accepted Louis XVIII's Constitutional Charter 
      • adopted the French Flag RED WHITE BLUE! 
      • "King of the French People" 
      • Casimir Perier "The Trouble with this country is that there are too many people like you who IMAGINE that there has been a revolution in France" 
        • WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?
          • Critical of people complaining about the government 
          • he said this to a DEPUTY complaining about the small extension of voting rights for people in France 
          • Perier basically tells this guy to chill because aristocracy will always rule and people are IMAGINING THESE REVOLUTIONS but no huge change in government reforms occurs 

    2.) 1848: Year of Losses/Ls - basically 2016 

    A.) What did we replace our Pear shaped guy with?
    • After Louis Philippe abdicated in favor of his grandson --> The common people REFUSED TO HAVE ANOTHER MONARCH 
    • instead - they replaced hi with a provisional republic - headed by a ten man executive committee 
    • Thus forming the SECOND REPUBLIC OF FRANCE WITH THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY

    B.) What up with "Paris Gone Wild" and Why did the Revolution of 1848 Fail?
    • WELL FIRST OF ALL ITS DOMINATED BY RADICAL SOCIALISTS 
    • Philippe's "Bourgeois monarchy" had been characterized by stubborn inaction and complacency 
      • His government's refusal to consider REFORM caused a sense of class INJUSTICE among middle class
    • but now Philippe is out and Constituent Assembly is in and they want a REPUBLIC 
    • Louis Blanc - represented the socialist RIGHT TO WORK 
      • He wanted permanent government sponsored cooperative workshops to be established for workers 
      • Moderate republicans were like HAAAAAA NO. but compromise:  form national workshops
    • Revolution failed because the aristocrats and peasants TEAMED UP AGAINST THE SOCIALISTS to stop the radical reforms
      • powerful = aristocrats
      • popular = socialists  

    (Losers = socialists) 
    3.) Austria 
    • The Revolution of Austrian Empire began in Hungary 
    • Hungarian Magyars wanted the Empire to DIE 
      • instead they wanted liberal constitutional reforms!
      • Hungarians demanded national autonomy, full civil liberties, and universal suffrage from Ferdinand I of Habsburg Fam
    •  Ferdinand I promised liberal reform - but we can't always keep our promises can we FERDINAND??!?!??!
    • Why did this fail?
      • Finally the conservative aristocratic forces gathered around Emperor Ferdinand I regained their nerve AND REASSERTED STRENGTH
        • Archduchess Sophia = conservative -->  insisted that Ferdinand abdicate in favor of HER SON, FRANCIS JOSEPH 
        • church agreed/nobles agreed --> organized a secret conspiracy to reverse and CRUSH THE REVOLUTION
    • Francis Joseph crowned emperor of Austria in 1848 
      • but OH NO Nicholas I of Russia led Russian troops into Hungary and subdued the country after fighting --> Habsburg fam ruled Hungary as a conquered territory 


    UGH THAT IS SO MUCH INFO IM SORRY GOOD LUCK STUDYING FAM