OVB the MVP

Otto von Bismarck wanted to secure power for himself and for Prussia. He approached this through the ideal that “the great decisions of our day will not be decided by speeches and negotiation but by blood and iron.” In other words, Prussia will gain power through war and industrialization. OVB was like the quarterback of Prussia and he called the plays. 

War:

Bismarck did not like the fact that the Danish king was trying to centralize the provinces of Denmark against the will of the German Confederation. The province of Schlesqig-Holstein shared a culture with Prussia. Bismarck, like Putin, wanted to to eventually control the province that shared the Prussian culture. By centralizing the provinces, the king of Denmark would cause Schlesqig-Holstein to become more Danish and Prussia would loose its influence. As a result, Prussia and Austria waged a short successful war against Denmark. Bismarck successfully retained influence over a province. 

Bismarck was convinced Prussia had to control the German confederation completely. This mean that Austria, a great German power, had to be taken out of German affairs. After a 7 week war Prussia defeated Austria. As a result, Austria withdrew from German affairs. At the time, Austria was extremely influential in the southern German states due to their geographic proximity and their cultural ties. Once Austria was taken out of German affairs, Prussia secured influence over southern Germany. This time, Bismarck successfully obtained influence over Germany. 

Bismarck is to Austria as Obama is to door 

Despite all the war and blood shed, Bismarck wanted to make peace domestically with the liberal middle class and the nationalist movement in order to secure his power domestically. He realized that nationalist was not necessarily hostile to a conservative, authoritarian government (which he was trying to create and obtain). By unifying the country under a conservative authoritarian government, Bismarck simultaneously secured his power as well as fortify and stabilize Prussia. Bismarck appeased liberals by allowing universal male suffrage. He wanted parliament’s approval, but was not bound to it. He would not have allowed male suffrage if he was not threatened by it. Bismarck was able to tame parliament, but treated it with indifference. As Becky stated, Bismarck had a “you’re not worth my time attitude.” This contrasts with Louis XIV’s attitude of rewarding Parliament. 

Industrialization:

During this time period, it was imperative that a country modernize and industrialize in order to keep up with the great powers of the world and maintain influence and power. Bismarck knew this well and acted on it. 

It is clear that OVB’s strategy of “blood and iron” pushed Prussia to become join the ranks of the Great Powers. He is the MVP of Prussia. 

Louis Napoleon and Italy's Issues

Louis Napoleon was Napoleon's nephew. He was elected as France's president in 1848 thanks to his last name and universal male suffrage giving him 3 times as many votes as any other candidate. His presidency started off good. He believed economic progress would  strengthen  the nation and encouraged banks and railroads to be built. However, when the National Assembly would not let him run again, he seized power on his own and like his uncle, asked the people to justify his illegal actions and at first they did. Only a year late, 97% in a plebiscite (pronounced like ple as in plea, bis as in bison, and cite as in cite your sources..ple-bis-cite) still wanted him ruling. Lewis Napolean began to loose support after he went to war with Prussia. Eventually in 1870, Lewis Napolean lost power in favor of a new constitution.

While all that stuff in France was happening, Italy was having its own issues. Since the Middle Ages, Italy had been divided into nation-states but with the rise of nationalism a united Italy seemed more and more appealing to the people living in Italy. The countries besides Italy such as England, France, and Austria actually fear Italy uniting because that would upset the balance of power.

These countries were not the only ones opposed to a unified Italy. One of Italy's biggest issues when trying to unite was a not as our class guessed, pizza or Italy or war. No, the answer was the pope. The pope did not want to unite because he had his own papal states that he wanted to remain in control of. As Kaitlyn put it,  the pope was killing the vibe of nationalism.

Some other people to keep in mind when learning about the rise of nationalism in Italy are...

Vincezo Gioberti

Gioberti was a Catholic priest who called for the unification of Italy under the pope. Obviously, this didn't work out. 

Cavour

Cavour was probably the most important piece in the nationalism puzzle. He united Italiy through a common enemy. Furthermore, he increased nationalism by building railroads and roads to make people feel more Italian and not their individual states.

Giuseppe Garibaldi 

Garibaldi was like an extreme version of Cavour. Cavour agreed on the same mission of uniting Italy as him but they both had different views on the means to get there. In one instant, Cavour actually went along with Garibaldi's plan to liberate the Two Sicileis just to get rid of him. Garibaldi and his guerrilla band of Red Shirts went to attack the pope and rome and Cavour sent forces to stop him. 

Actual picture of the Gorilla band of Red Shirts 

Wait sorry this is the picture not the one above

Cavour may have been in favor of nationalism but Garbidi's was a radical. 

Cavour was defiantly a liberal in the political spectrum and by no means a conservative  but Garibaldi was a flat out radical.

Victor Emmanuel 

Emmauel was the parliamentary monarch the new kingdom of Italy was placed under. He was described as neither radical or democratic. 

Prostitutes, Prostitutes, Prostitutes

The Industrial Revolution resulted in a period of upheaval that changed the face of society. The greatest difference was the breakup of social groups. Both the middle and the working class separated into three groups. For the middle class, it was upper, middle and lower. Although, each class had different jobs, they were united by a certain lifestyle. Since the middle class had extra money, they could buy the new mass produced goods. Everyone began to have the same items because they were buying the same goods. The middle class were also motivated by their desire to emulate the upper class so they adopted lifestyles that mirrored some upper-class traditions. 

Like first world problems of today, the middle
class were united by different issues and desires.

The working class had a similar breakup of skills. They were separated into highly skilled, semiskilled, and unskilled. These factions were less united than the middle class due to the tension that existed among them. Due to the industrial revolution, machines were beginning to take the place of highly skilled workers. There was no need to pay a skilled worker to do a job that could be easily be accomplished by an underpaid unskilled worker and a machine. The skilled workers were threatened by the unskilled workers who could easily take their job by taking care of a machine. Some workers even formed a group called the Luddites that destroyed that machines that they believed were stealing their jobs. 

Sexual relationships were also beginning to change as illustrated in the title. With the concentration of people in the city, prostitution began to grow as well as illegitimacy. The lack of societal restrictions allowed men and women to have improper relationships. Men found it easier to see prostitutes in the city and women had premarital sex. Without the controls found in rural society, people were allowed to make decisions they would not have normally man. 

The movement of society to the city opened the doors for many actions that would have be frowned upon in the past. Society altered along with the public. 

Industrialization Q&A

What were the four main agents of industrialization?

1. British technology

The British tried to keep their technical discoveries a secret from other European nations. British law prohibited artisans and skilled mechanics to leave Britain until 1825, and until 1843 the export of textile machinery and other equipment was prohibited. Some ambitious workers fled Britain illegally and introduced the new technologies in other countries, thus spreading the Industrial Revolution throughout Europe. William Cockerill was an example of one of these ambitious men. Cockerill developed cotton-spinning equipment in French-occupied Belgium, and soon talented workers left Britain to work for him. With them these workers brought British plans and technological secrets to Cockerill, spreading British technology throughout Europe and developing it further.

2. Entrepreneurs

Talented entrepreneurs such as Fritz Harkfort sought to take British technology and build businesses upon it. Harkfort, a German business pioneer, was serving in England during the Napoleonic wars and was impressed with the British machinery. He decided that Germany had to catch up with Britain's achievements, and used English mechanics and iron parts to build and sell engines in Germany. Entrepreneurs as such, in seeking to create big business and increase their success, helped spread industrialization throughout Europe, creating jobs for and selling technology to the population.

3. Government

Governments often helped business people in continental countries to overcome some of their difficulties. Tariff protection, for example, benefited the profits of big businesses (though they increased burdens on the poor). (Gyarn side note - do tariff protection and nationalism coincide? It is, indeed, of national interest to protect domestic industry. However tariff protection comes down hard on the poor which can reduce the poor's sense of national unity, economic equality, and appreciation for government, which so crucially contribute to nationalism.) Many governments also bore the costs of building roads, railroads, and canals, to help domestic trade flourish and tie the nation together.

4. Banks

Banks played a more significant role in continental Europe vs. Britain. In the 1830s, two Belgian banks moved away from the commonplace of small, private banks organized as secret partnerships. They received permission from the government to establish themselves as corporations enjoying limited liability. Limited liability means that a stock-holder could lose only his or her original investment in the bank's common stock and could not be assessed for any additional losses. This attracted investors and shareholders, allowing the banks to build impressive resources for investment in big companies. These banks thus became industrial banks, promoting industrialization, and many continental European banks soon followed in these footsteps.

Just how important was the industrialization to the nation-state during this period? How did Friedrich make Germany a nation-state?

The Industrial Revolution was crucial to the development of the nation-state. Industrialization created jobs, stimulated economy, and created new working classes. Industrialization majorly contributed to nationalism, and to the creation of the nation-state, through economic nationalism. Friedrich List promoted industry, considering the "growth of modern industry of most importance because manufacturing was a primary means of increasing people's well-being and relieving their poverty." He supported the formation of a customs union, or Zollverein, among separate German states. He allowed trade between German states to go without tariff, but enacted a tariff for international trade. In doing so he eliminated much of the disunity among the German states and created a sense of nationalism among them, while also promoting industry and stimulating the economy.

The Effects of Industrialization

Child labor existed at this time not because people had worse morals than they do today, but because most people weren't aware of the physical and mental exertion put on children in the factories. Previously, children worked on their family's farm, where the treatment of the children was evident to the entire family and community. But in factories and coal mines, the owners and supervisors often overworked the laborers and lied about their treatment to the public. They preferred children for their tiny fingers and cheaper price. Families needed their children to work for the extra wages that could go toward the rent.
The public, for a long time, had no way of knowing what happened to children inside the factories. When the abuse became more well-known, humanists and activists headed a commission to "find the truth and protect the youth" (thank angelica for that one). The commission was successful in that it banned women and children under 12 from working in the factories and mines.


The issues that the factory workers faced can be considered a failure of the ideas of liberalism.  Liberalism pushed for an end to government interference in all economic affairs. But when factories and mines were not monitored by the government, they abused their power and exploited both children and adults. The best solution would be a happy medium with the government only interfering to prohibit illegal and wrongful actions committed by big companies.
There is such a thing as positive and negative liberty. Should people have freedom from or freedom to do something. For example, should a person have freedom from big companies'  labor abuse or the freedom to work for whatever company they choose.

Was there any room for liberalism in Paris? No, because in Parisian urban society, people were able to live in freedom but still be able to adapt to the changing circumstances linked to industrialization. There was also more of a chance to move up the social ladder in the post-industrial society- more jobs were created that separated the small elite class and the large laboring poor. The major downturn of industrialization in Paris was poo. Because of the lack of transportation and the government's inability to react quickly enough to the changing atmosphere, the poo piled up. Poo.

Despite there being more opportunities for work in the urban environment, the upper class continued to make the highest percentage of money. The poorest 80% (working classes) received less income altogether than the two richest classes combined.

The Factory Act and the Mines Act both protected the businessman over the worker. But the next big act from government was the Combination Act, which protected the worker over the businessman. These almost-contradictory set of acts represents the government's new need to pay more attention to what the people wanted after the voting population expanded in England. The government had to pay more attention to the needs of the majority instead of to those of the elite few.

Industrial Underwear

Why of all places did the Industrial Revolution start in Britain?

1. Agriculture
• Thanks to the enclosure movement, people were able to experiment more with various methods of agriculture. This produced new methods of farming that included new inventions. By improving agriculture, the supply of food increased and prices went down. Now, all classes could enjoy the luxury of paying for their food and for manufactured goods. As a result, domestic demand for manufactured goods increased.
2. Atlantic Economy
• North America, Latin America, and Africa opened up the market for Great Britain. Not only was there a demand for manufactured goods and agricultural products domestically, but also internationally. Since Great Britain was the strongest naval power, it was cheaper to trade by water. Canals and rivers made domestic shipping possible as well.

 

Triangle trade

1. Support System (Assets)
• Great Britain had a stable structure, government, and economy that acted as a support system which allowed the industrial revolution to prosper. The central bank allowed the government to regulate currency. As Becky pointed out, the currency needed to have elasticity. Additionally, Great Britain had a well developed credit market. This means that capitalists and other businessmen had ample opportunity to get loans and to get credit because investors were willing to loan and raise the capital to make the companies that would create factories. This is contrary to France where private investment had been crowded of credit markets because the government was borrowing so much money to fund the wars and Versailles there was less credit available for private French business to start industrial companies. 

What was the greatest change to occur in Britain thanks to the Revolution? Underwear. Or body linen as it was known. Previously, only the wealthy could afford such luxuries as underwear. However, thanks to greater production and, therefore, more widespread prosperity, everyone, including the peasants achieved a higher standard of living. Factories allowed for more products to be produced and for more people to have work as compared to the putting out system. This is because people did not have to be skilled to work in a factory since they could rely on machines, which made efficient production possible. 

The technological revolution advanced along side the industrial revolution. New technology also acted as a support for the industrial revolution. Machinery such as the spinning jenny and water frame acted as catalysts for the formation of factories and for the creation of other inventions which would support the high demand for manufactured goods. 

Water Frame 

Spinning Jenny 

One of the most important inventions, the steam engine, temporarily solved the nation’s energy problem. Previously, factories had to rely on wood (charcoal) for energy. However, as the population grew, forests were being cut down. The supply of wood was depleting. The early steam engines were powerful albeit inefficient converters of energy. The steam engines would burn coal to produce steam which would then be used to operate a pump. James Watt increased the efficiency of the steam engine by adding a separate condenser. For the first time humans had almost unlimited power at their disposal. Thanks to Watt, steam engines were used to advance and expand many industries. 

Watt's Steam Engine 

Later, the steam engines would give birth to the railroads. The railroad reduced the cost and uncertainty of shipping freight over land. Markets grew larger and nationwide. The larger markets encouraged larger factories, which produced more goods. Since the factories produced more, their goods were cheaper. As a result, cottage workers and urban artisans faced competitive pressures from the large companies. The railroad also created a strong demand for unskilled labor and many men began to look towards cities and towns for work. 


The conditions were perfect for the creation of the Industrial Revolution in Europe. The Industrial Revolution not only transformed the British economy, but also its culture and society. 

The people don't like their government?! No way!!

There were major problems happening in three countries at this time: England, Ireland, and France. What a surprise!!!

First off, the mess that is England.
Who's in charge? The two major bodies in Parliament were the Whigs and the Tories. At the advent of all these radical movements, the Tories were fearful of anyone demanding change. They repressed all kinds of popular protest. But as time went by, they adapted to the changes in the political atmosphere and became more open-minded. For instance, the Tories passed the Ten Hours Act of 1847, which limited the workday for women and young people to 10 hours. In contrast, the Whigs were consistently pro-business and manufacturing. The one major exception to this was that they pushed through the Reform Bill of 1832, which gave new industrial areas of the country more representation and eliminated the "rotten boroughs" (electoral districts bought by the aristocracy). Although the Whigs were responsible for this bill, the Tories were the ones who responded to the byproduct of this bill- that they had to become more responsive to the needs of the masses (mass politics) or be voted out.

What was going on? The Chartist movement was the major radical program being pushed at this time. It called for universal male suffrage. This movement was extremely radical for its time but when compared to the Revolutions of 1848, it doesn't seem so bad. While both of these things failed, they did sew the seeds for change in the second half of the century.

Second off, poor Ireland, which was COMPLETELY ABANDONED by the British (yes I'm still bitter)
What was going on? The potato famine was devastating almost the entire population, whose only source of substinence was the potato. Absentee lordism was one of the major reasons for the famine. The liberalism of the parties in England just let things be and didn't regulate the work of the Irish farmers. This laissez faire economy only aggravated the situation in Ireland. To make things worse, English lords, even during the famine, demanded that the Irish continue to pay the same amount of taxes and export their same amount of crops to them.

Lastly, weak and fragile France.
Who was in charge?
Louis XVIII was a weak, weak ruler. His inability to pick a side in the debate between the aristocracy and the middle/lower class earned him no supporters. His one major contribution, the Constitutional Charter, was basically a liberal constitution so it angered the aristocracy.  However, it was far from a democratic charter, power was only given to the wealthiest of people who, with the king and his ministers, ruled the land.

Charles X can be characterized as a true reactionary. This means that he was ultra-conservative. Instead of wanting to keep things the way they were, he wanted to turn back the block to the time of Louis XVI. He repudiated (barfed on) the Constitutional Charter and gained much resistance from the radical part of the population (which consisted of the majority of people in France) So basically, after the entire country had just begun to recover from the destruction caused by a revolution against a monarch and aristocratic system, Charles thought it would be a good idea to bring that system back.

Louis Philippe's rule was rather ineffective. His "bourgeois monarchy" produced a lack of social legislation, and a corrupt system dominated by the rich. While he did accept the Constitutional Charter, he was not able to prevent the Revolutions of 1848 from overtaking the nation.