Totalitarianism vs. Fascism with a hint of the Soviet Union

We started the class again with acknowledging the fact that most people are dumb and ignorant. Then, I became lost in what was being discussed for the remainder of the class. 


Totalitarianism vs. Fascism 

• Totalitarianism 
• EVERYTHING is under the government control 
• originated from the total war effort of WWI 
• the war was over, but this ideal continued on 
• oppressed the people, but they didn't mind because it left them better off than what their conditions would be without totalitarianism (aka starving and dead) 
• Mussolini described it as "all within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.' 
• 

(name a more destructive, inhuman, evil duo in history, ill wait) 

• side note: let's bring it back to France... so Louis XIV tried to be a totalitarian but wasn't able to follow through on in 

 

• Fascism 
• authoritarian rule; a dictator who works by action rather than reason without being challenged; the government has control over the lives of the people 

• Are Totalitarianism and Fascism the same? 
• no 
• Erin says that all fascists are totalitarians but not all totalitarians are fascists---meaning that totalitarianism is an umbrella with ideologies under it---
• Totalitarians have NO rivals from within the country. it is the STATE and only the STATE 
• for this reason Mussolini is sometimes not considered a totalitarian because he had the rival of the Catholic Church from within Italy
• fascism is a state of beliefs, a political ideology while totalitarianism is a way to run the government, a tool to achieve fascism  
• fascism wants the country to be run by ONE party... totalitarianism takes it further and makes the states the end all be all of every single daily task 

The unique situations in each country after WWI gave rise to the unique forms of governments that were established. For example Soviet Union and Germany 

• German fascists vs. Soviet Communism 
• DIFFERENT ENDS OF THE SPECTRUM 
• Soviets wanted just one large class while the Germans were okay with different classes and social levels 
• Soviets did not allow capitalism while the Germans did 
• "Soviet communism seized all private property (except personal property)" - the book. So, the private property is stuff that can give u profit (land, business) and personal is like items like jewelry. most were allowed to keep their own land in Germany 

What's happening in Mother Russia and the rest of the USSR?  

• Lenin is in control and passes the New Economic Policy (NEP) which helped Russia recover after a Civil War and World War that caused people to stave. It "jumpstarted things." Surprisingly, it established economic freedom aka allowed capitalism !!!!!
• then Lenin began approaching death and the great debate began 
• the great debate: to strength Russia or to help create a world revolution? 
• Stalin thinks that straightening Russia is THE most important task at hand 
• Trotsky thinks that uniting the workers of the world and spreading communism is a better choice 

(@ Trotsky) 

• Stalin wins out and eventually has Trotsky killed 

(poor Trotsky) 

• Stalin puts his Five Year Plan into action with the goal of modernizing Russia bc its lagging SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO far behind the western countries 
• NO CAPITALISM 
• collectivism aka making the peasants share land
• is this collectivism like the pre enclosure of the Medieval Europe? 
• Erin says it's not bc Stalin was collectivizing to feed the population and as a punishment to keep the peasants in their place and stop local resistance 
• note that a wealthy peasant was called a Kulak 
• collectivism is NOT part of the plan to make Russia an industrial power 
• even so, they're kinda linked bc the enclosure acts took away private land and created the industrial revolution. the collectivism in USSR made lands shared and was passed in a time where the country craved to be industrious  
• the symbol on the flag of the USSR is the a hammer (industry) and a sickle (agriculture)  

Fascism

Fascism - the ideology for stupid people (is that offensive?)


Mussolini's quote edited for important parts:

If it is admitted that the nineteenth century has been the century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy, Political doctrines pass; peoples remain. It is to be expected that this century may be that of authority, a century of the "Right," a Fascist century. If the nineteenth was the century of the individual it may be expected that this one may be the century of "collectivism" and therefore the century of the State. - Mussolini

so is the 20th century really the century of the state?

well, this century of the state would really be from 1932-2032 bc thats when it started but nevertheless...

In this state run world, the government has control over everything. Erin made a lovely reference to the welfare estate where the government plays the key role in protecting and promoting the social and economic well-being of its citizens.

Some people argue against Mussolini and say that the 20th century was the century for the people, where people gained more rights and liberties (aka UNIVERSAL MANHOOD SUFFRAGE in some places at least), basically did everything against fascism, so its a disputed concept.

so, how did we go from hereditary monarchs in 19th century to fascism?

WORLD WAR I IS THE ANSWER!!!

Fascism was born for socialism and liberalism which had promised to make things better and make people more free yet these political ideologies brought about the worst war in history.

according to lily, "let's change to something without reason because world war i had no reason either"

Yarn then asked if we would feel the same way if we were german... most of us agreed we would say different if we were german.

the germans to us (also shoutout to this poor red-haired kid) 

But how we got to fascism begs the question... WHAT EVEN IS FASCISM 

well i finally wikipediad it (yes i made wikipedia a verb) and fascism is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that wants society under a totalitarian one party system in order to succeed economically and such. 

in class we talked about how its everything going towards the state, losing your individuality... 

so can we get this confused with communism? 

i mean we are totally going to get this stuff confused because its just really confusing, but maybe if we compare and contrast it will make more sense. 

Yarn asked if they were similar by means or by motive. they are similar in means because both used violence to get their plan accomplished (aka spanish civil war for fascism and stalin for communism) 

but they are different as erin pointed out because fascism is more focused on nationalism while communism is internationalism (workers of the world remember??) 

fascism was about blood wars and certain races being better than another. (hitler) Making the state the best was the ultimate goal. 

but is statism the same thing as nationalism? 

statism is the state has centralized control over economic and social affairs in the nation. its basically putting the state above everything, which sounds similar to fascism and nationalism. so no they aren't the same thing but they are related. 

so was hitler a fascist? 

Well, He was definitely a fascist in terms of propaganda... as mentioned before with the race wars and such... we all know that story. 

Hitler was a statist right? I mean he controlled most of everything in germany by the end of his dictatorship or whatever he called it... 

besides for political turmoil, there was also religious turmoil like the question: WHO KILLED GOD?

Well Nietzsche is the famous guy who wrote that... he asks a lot of questions and never really answers them (how socratic of him lol) 

At first we thought it was the people of this century, then Nietzsche mentioned how science and technology did it (in his title) and we realized that it was WWI that killed God. 

After such an irrational war with so much damage, people lost their faith in their nation, and then eventually lost their faith in God. The age of anxiety was them trying to find reason. 

BUT IS TRYING TO FIND REASON THE SAME THING AS DECLARING THERE IS NO PURPOSE/REASON? 

Finally, moving from religious, there is the economic aspect.

public 

KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS 

John Maynard Keynes created Keynesian economics (shocker) and this was the idea of priming the pump. This means that the government should start spending money to give the citizens spending money and jobs. This will increase the economy. 

The opposite of this is the trickle down theory that says that the rich should get tax breaks so they have more money to spend in the economy. 

Keynes said that the treaty of versailles was bad because it was all about revenge and not about fixing the economy of europe and making europe strong again. 

quick point: remember the weimar republic and why germany didn't become communist and remember who rosa luxemburg is. 

if you don't remember this, germany didn't become communist because the leaders weren't communist enough for it to survive (remember the whole pink not red thing) and rosa luxemburg was a polish communist who became a german citizen. 

Age of Anxiety

So today we talked about how at the end of the war everyone was anxious about everything... pretty much how we are all feeling right now. 


Was There Anxiety at the Paris Peace Conference? 

• FOR SURE
• they were happy that it was happening, but they were supper nervous as to what was going to come out of it 
• The Allies loaded reparations on Germany because they wanted to weaken Germany as much as possible 
• They were ANXIOUS that Germany was going to attack them again 
• There was also anxiety in America over what the people wanted v. what Wilson wanted 

Everyone at the Peace Conference 

Side Note: At this time, France was in its Third Republic 

Plot twist though --> Germany was the most anxious !!!!

• The German people were starving at this time, mostly due to the fact that they were still being blockaded by the navies 
• They worried that if they agreed to terms, they would have to tax the people like crazy to get money which means the people would starve 
• BUT if they didn't agree they would continue to starve 

Germany 

Germany's status at the end of the war: 

- They had a revolution kind of like the one in Russia 

- Modern socialists took charge 

A popular question of the day was: Why weren't they (They being Germany) Communist? 

-They weren’t losing morale 

Communism was already diluted- didn’t really take that much of a hold 

They wanted to establish real political democracy and civil liberties, and they favored the gradual elimination of capitalism 

People were appalled by the prospect of civil war and revolutionary terror

Balfour Declaration 

-Euro powers wanted middle east land 

-The ottoman turks fell, so the Europeans had an opportunity to split up the middle east  up 

-While they were cutting it up, they designated an area for the Jewish people in Israel

-Declared that Britain favored a “National Home for the Jewish People” in palestine

- But without prejudicing the civil and religious rights of the existing non- Jew communities 

The British to the Jews 

Results of the Treaty/War/Etc. 

Four very important people we have to know: 

1) Nietzsche 

He was a philosopher who was part of a small band of thinkers in the late 19th century to challenge the belief in progress and the general faith in the rational human mind.

Important Thoughts: 

- "God is Dead": In Nietzsche's view, recent developments in modern science and the increasing secularization of European society had effectively 'killed' the Christian God, who had served as the basis for meaning and value in the West for many, many years.

-ubermensch= the solution to the death of God 

-will to power= humans are always wiling to inflict their will on others 

*He relates to the Age of Anxiety because his ideas about God being dead and such came from a place of anxiety, and created further anxiety* 

2) Marcel DuChamp 

He was an artist, chess player, and visionary 

Important Views: 

-Dadaism- attacked all accepted standards of art and behavior, delighting in outrageous conduct 

How does this make sense for the age of anxiety 

People start questioning everything- causes anxiety 

DuChamp’s most famous work is a urinal in which he dubbed “Fountain” 

It’s the opposite of what it is 

Everything is all mixed up in this time→ Age of Anxiety 

3) Sigmund Freud 

Important Views: 

-Unconscious v conscious 

-Animal instincts 

-Ego 

-How you grow up affects the way you think→ it is all society’s fault 

-Search for meaning in a time where people could not find meaning 

-Explain the unexplainable 

-One of the major things= ego, superego, id 

- Talk therapy 

4) Pablo Picasso 

- He was an artist

- His works represent Disenchantement with war--> everything is not what it seems 

and now.. you knew this was coming: 

What we should be doing tonight: 

What we are actually doing thanks to Yarn: 

The Russian Revolutions

To briefly recall where things last left off in Russia, Nicholas II put in place the October Manifesto which set up numerous reforms such as the Duma. However, many of these recently granted reforms were steadily taken back as Nicholas II tried to assert his power.

• Since this point, Russia found itself progressively losing ground and status as it lost numerous wars. Given this:

What was one of the main reasons why Russia lost its groove?

• Lack of adequate leadership proved to be a significant problem during this time in Russia. This lack was due in part to the weak, indecisive Nicholas II who held said power.

• Analyzing the Russian revolutions that followed Nicholas II's later abdication, connections can be drawn between Nicholas II and Louis XVI, king in the years leading to the French Revolution of 1789.

Are Nicholas II and Louis XVI the same?

• Both men, while facing different national backgrounds, can be identified as inept rulers . Between Nicholas II and Louis XVI there exists a common theme of weakness and disconnect with the masses. Thus, such issues brought on their respective downfalls.

The March Revolution

While the events of the March Revolution and their immediate reasons are fairly understandable, it is more difficult to clearly assign complete blame to any one party. In addition, fault can be attributed to Russia's continuing position in World War I .

Below are some of the individuals or preceding events that could be found to have contributed to the uprisings.

Nicholas II :  Given his role as tsar, Nicholas II had the ultimate power to remove Russia from World War I , where it was increasingly facing defeat. However, as the war and defeat dragged on, the feelings of the people waned leading to popular unrest.

Tsarina Alexandra:

To what extent was the March Revolution Alexandra's fault?

• With her husband at the front, tsarina Alexandra found herself relying heavily upon the Serbian peasant, Rasputin as a magical healer and chief advisor.
• Her reliance on Rasputin led to many questions and speculations by the public on the state of the ruling family.

• Many feared that the true power was in the hands of Rasputin with the tsar and tsarina as his puppets.

Background on Rasputin

-Rasputin was a Serbian peasant who was invited into the palace as a self-proclaimed healer.

- Often drunk, Rasputin would prophesize future events and employ certain methods of healing.

- He was brought into the palace to cure the heir apparent, Alexis, who had hemophilia.

-So as not to reveal a heath setback in the future ruler, the tsar and tsarina kept the information from the public.

- Thus, to a broader extent, Alexis could share in the blame for the March Revolution.

 - This only succeeded in the public questioning Rasputin's presence in the kingdom.

Why was her reliance on Rasputin so problematic?

• By relying heavily on Rasputin and his role in helping her son, tsarina Alexandra let many of the growing tensions without remedy. After Rasputin was murdered, the tsarina was sent into a state of shock that left her largely incapable of controlling the masses as they began their uprising.

                       Why else would tsarina Alexandra not been trusted by the Russian people ?

• Alexandra was a German princess by birth. As World War I was raging on, many Russians viewed her with suspicion, not knowing if her loyalties went to Germany or Russia.

The Provisional Government

• Following the March Revolution, Nicholas II abdicates. This allows the Duma to set up a provisional government to take his place.
• Among issues of competing with the Petrograd Soviet for total power and the mandating of such laws as Army Order No. 1, the provisional government ends in failure.

Why, then, did the provisional government fail?

The provisional government continued efforts in World War I. 

• Had the provisional government made the choice to exit World War I rather than continue, they could have survived longer than they did.  While the provisional government would have probably still failed, it had a better chance of sticking around longer if they chose this route instead.
• The failures of Russia's involvement in World War I only created better opportunities for people like Lenin and the Bolsheviks to seize power.
• With slogans such as  "Peace, Land, Bread" , Lenin found a fairly responsive public as he assumed the role that the provisional government could not.

The French Revolution v. The Russian Revolution

Both revolutions have similar roots causes of shortage of bread, demands for land, and an ultimate call for peace after years of violent uprisings.

The Second Revolution

The second Russian Revolution during this period existed between two enemy groups:

- White Army

- Red Army

- The conflict led to civil war within Russia between the two sides.

White Army

• The White Army included all other groups in Russia that opposed Communist rule under Lenin and the Bolsheviks. This group was united by little else aside from having a common enemy in the Red Army.

Red Army

• The Red Army was Lenin's forces coming from the capital.

Why did the Red Army win the civil war?

• This win had two immediate reasons:

- Had the White Army won the civil war, there were few points on which they agreed on for setting up a replacement government.

- Communist fighters in the Red Army had a clearer rallying point and strongly believed in the ideas, or cause, for which they were fighting.

The Red Army

Building up to WWI

Remember, if you will, that speech by David Lloyd George explaining why Britain was really a victim of WWI, not an instigator.

So how was Britain even involved in the war if what we have read so far focuses mainly on Serbia, Germany, and Austria-Hungary??

• At first, Britain was neutral and tried avoiding war
• Everything changed when Germany attacked
• Britain honored its alliance to Belgium

* Germans

Wait...

Britain was scared of Germany??? Why???

• Germany was exhibiting some serious imperialistic tendencies (threat to power)
• It was building a spanking new NAVY
• (remember Kaiser touching the butt (of the ship))

Britain's response to Kaiser

And Britain wanted to have the best ships:

• They developed the Dreadnought as a response to Kaiser's actions
• These early 1900s ships were bigger and better
• A large navy goes with prestige and makes a nation a great power
• This event exemplified the militarism and nationalism that brought the war into fruition.

Britain to Britain

Enough about Britain (sorry Mr. Yarnall)

What actually started WWI??

• Gavrilo Princip shoots archduke Ferdinand (and his wife)
• Truly the straw that broke the camel's back since there were so many events that had built up tension before this instance
• But why call him a hero?
• He didn't plan on starting a war.  He just wanted independence

Sadly, a lot of the problems that come out of WWI wreak havoc afterwards (middle east, Nazis)

Everything going wrong after WWI

Now for something infinitely sadder, Russian history

Let's get some background on Russia at the eve of the war

• Nicholas II - the last Russian Tsar
• He dealt with the Revolution of 1905 by halfheartedly making concessions to the populous of Russia
• His October Manifest created the Duma (a representative body) and seemed like he would be more liberal
• First seemingly liberal Tsar since Alexander II (who was actually called Tsar Liberator after emancipating the serfs)

Sadly

Nicholas II wasn't as cool as he seemed

• He kept dismissing the Duma when they didn't do exactly what he wanted
• He created an unstable environment with a complete disconnect between the people and the Tsar

When someone asks how well Nicholas II is doing

How does Russia fit into WWI

• Its alliance with Serbia dragged it into the war (kinda similar to Britain)
• Pan-Slavism - their common ethnicity bound them together 

However, war was the last thing Russia needed:

• It was militarily and industrially far behind
• They used PEOPLE instead of WEAPONS

WORST OF ALL

Lenin

• Germany sent Lenin back into Russia (although he had been banished) 
• He incites civil unrest and causes irreparable damage

Finally...

War

TOP 5 THINGS WE KNOW ABOUT WWI

1. Trench warfare on the western front which caused a war of attrition
2. Technological advances in weapons make war bloody but backwardness in transportation and communication kept the war stagnant
3. So many different places of the world fought on one side or the other (even Australians)
4. Total war - everything was dedicated to the war effort (labor, restricting diet)
5. A war defying expectations: it ruined ideals of an honorable war and lasted much longer than anticipated

Imperialism

Imperialism 

Causes of Imperialism

The Catholics and The Missionaries 

Literally that whole paragraph is unreal lol. As if that happened. 

• this was a goal in India, Africa, and the America's. 
• Unfortunately, this also then started The White Man's Burden
• Which was a poem essentially saying that it was the white man's responsibility to educate and civilize every other race, ethnicity, etc. 
• Montaigne was the "first" guy to speak up (a little bit before this period) and was like "Look, you white folks are actually doing more harm than help :/ ) 

The Technology also contributed to Imperialism 

• Caravel Ship
• Map and Compass (helioscope??) 
• Sexton 

The Europeans were all now able to travel the oceans without dying!! 

So... is the difference between the two Imperialism Periods solely the Industrial Revolution advancements? 

• Yes, the Industrial Revolution was the major factor 
• but the technology also contributed (such as the sexton) 
• The first period of Imperialism: what one can get from the land itself (Christianity, gold...etc.) 
• The second period of Imperialism: what power one could get from having this land 

The real reason the Dutch wanted Africa (Beer and Cigarettes)

Moving on to Africa! 

• There are two major groups in South Africa 
• Afrikaners (who are descendants of the Dutch) 
• British
• They could NOT get along, mainly because they both wanted land and power. 
• The Boer Wars : (not the BOAR wars, I am not Abigail of Pig, but Abigail of Land thank you very much) 
• There was the first and second Boer wars, but overall the British won. 
• Yet... why was this land actually so important? Did it really need two wars? 
• Africa had diamonds and gold
• sole reason people cared about South Africa tbh
• The problems from this period essentially cemented Africa's current problems. 
• The system in South Africa was called apartheid. 
• this ENCOURAGED segregation 
• There were written laws about the rights the upper class had, vs. the middle, vs. the lower. 
• Fun Side Note: WATCH INVICTUS

• It's so good (soccer movie about Nelson Mandela, deals with this society) 
• and it has Matt Damon in it 

The Berlin Conference

• So there was this want of a balance of power 
• no one country should take over more smaller countries than the other
• This stemmed the Open Door Policy with Roosevelt (miss that guy :( ) 
• No one Western power was allowed to influence China more than another
• equal opportunity to exploit it haha poor China 
• Migration Between these Places 
• The Great White Walls = Chinese Exclusion Act
• literally just kept the Asians out 

Mass Politics and Mass Loyalty to the State

• Hobson, who was a critic of Imperialism, essentially said that Imperialism only benefited certain groups, not the whole nation.
• And, he was right. 
• when countries invaded other ones, the goal was to divert the social causes back at home
• no one was setting up industries or establishments in these conquered lands

Critics of Imperialism

• Hobson: 
• Influenced Lenin, who wrote a book Imperialism is the highest form of Capitalism
• The main problem with imperialism was that it did not pay off 
• no economic advantage
• and it only benefitted the superior, upper class white people. 

The Political Cartoons (Short Debrief) 

• Dropping the Pilot 
• When Germany (Kaiser Will) dismissed OVB from power
• literally worst thing they could have done 
• Kaiser Will is the evil nemo 
• his impetuous is a major cause for World War I
• One from APUSH 
• Triple ALLIANCE: Italy, Austria-Hungary, Germany 
• Triple ENTENTE: Russia, France, and the United Kingdom 
• the world was just waiting for this one murder of a politician/leader... already had kindling and lumber built up. Once the match was lit, it spread (hence the alliances, everyone sticking up for one another...) 
• eventually, the world was just in full war. 

SHOCKER I HAVE THE BEGINNING OF THE CHAPTER...AGAIN

Hello. So this is the first post of Chapter 26/27 On Imperialism/WWI 

1.) Fin de siècle - WHAT THE HECK IS THAT?!

• That is a French phrase for "Turn of the century" or "end of the century" ==> it is making a reference to the closing of one era and onset of another 
• this term is used SPECIFICALLY with the end of the 19th century -- a period of degeneration, but at the same time a period of HOPE for a new beginning 
• OK SO WHY did the FRENCH MAKE UP THIS PHRASE ?
• Last time we saw France in the Franco-Prussian War/Louis Napoleon - they were losing pretty hard
• SO NEW YEAR NEW FRANCE 

2.) New Imperialism... well why is it "new"? IS THIS PERIOD MORE EXTRACTIVE THAN THE PERIOD THAT PRECEDED IT?

• first of all let's define extractive thanks to Erin: Exploiting what lands another has and taking it for your own use
• So yes this is NEW IMPERIALISM because compared to Columbus and the good ol days in APUSH with the 13 colonies that were UNCONQUERED TERRITORY- western imperialism sometimes meant conquering lands that were already taken / not really settling there and starting a new life - more of a HEY LETS GET THAT AND SEE IF IT'S PROFITABLE 
• except when we get to AFRICA that is not the case because like 80% of Africa is unclaimed lands - but we aren't there yet so don't worry about it :) 

3.) Sidenote: Imperialism is one of the four main reasons why WWI started!!!

• Well What are the other three? Glad you asked
• 1.) Imperialism
• 2.) Militarism
• 3.) Nationalism
• 4.) Alliances (way to ruin the "ism" streak SMH) 

(All of us when its 8 am and we get back on topic instead of talking about Trudeau)

4.) Is it incorrect to think these people are all packing up and going to America? 

• Well APPARENTLY there is a common American assumption that European migration meant migration to the US. But that is highly inaccurate 
• Some of these people that traveled from Europe to America were not really completely MIGRATING - they were called SWALLOWS 
• not permanent settlers
• there is a misconception that everyone comes to American and STAYED 
• these people would invest in their own wheat/flax in Italy and then they "flew" to Argentina to harvest wheat between December and April 
• then they back to Italy to do the same in Spring --> Making money all year round

Swallows be like:

but then....

5.) What does Industrialization have to do with any of this? 

• Industrialization/technology made trade more accessible/transportation more feasible
• also because of industrialization - the small artisans and farmers were being driven out of their property/businesses AND SO THEY looked for brighter horizons in new lands  

6.) Three Thing to 100% KNOW:

1. In 1750, the average standard of living was no higher in Europe as a whole than in the rest of the world. 

2.) It was industrialization that opened the gaps in average wealth and well-being among countries and regions. 

3.Income per person stagnated in the Third World before 1913, in striking contrast to the industrializing regions 

1. but what if Africa/Asia are interacting with European countries now - why is it flat lined?? 
1. European imperialists were taking everything OUT of these countries/continents instead of HELPING THEM THRIVE independently 
2. Drained the wealth for their own countries
3. Still not completely covered - Yarn said the more we read the more we will know

(*Lily gets us back on topic a billion times)

*Class AND YARN start to get off topic

*lily: "So at the turn of the nineteenth cen--

(we love you Lil) 

7.) Extra facts to be aware of:

• What was the economic theory for American Imperialism?
• Mercantilism!!! 
• Friedrich List's "Dwarf Economy"
• An economy with TINY landholdings and declining craft trades