Here we find that deep strain of violence that infused European culture after the fall of Rome come to it's logical conclusion, fratricide. Bingham 11/2/2017 19:31:23
What aspects of Europe’s nineteenth-century history contributed to the First World War? Aspects of Europe’s nineteenth-century history that contributed to the First World War include the emergence of Germany and Italy as unified states, which disrupted the fragile balance of power between Europe’s major countries that had been established after the defeat of Napoleon in 1815; and growing popular nationalism in Europe; industrialization and industrialized militarism; and competition among
European powers for colonial empires also played a significant role. Should have heard all this in Diaz’ class! Cassie Barham 12/2/2017 11:57:17 I'm currently reading the chapter, and I want to bring up a recurring subject in this book. When discussing leaders that effectively concentrated or assumed power, Strayer uses the term "charismatic leader." I wanted to ask about this term, because the qualifier
"charismatic" doesn't seem like a particularly concrete idea. I looked up the word for a specific definition and one I got was: "exercising a compelling charm that inspires devotion in others." But I guess what I'm wondering is what exactly does "charm" in a leader look like? How was the devotion that these leaders garnered expressed? It's clearly important because it's repeated so often, but Strayer doesn't really seem to go more in depth with defining that. I thought I'd turn here to
get y'all's input. Since it keeps getting brought up I figured it be a good idea for us to get a holistic understanding of what "charismatic leader" means. :) Bingham 12/2/2017 12:28:32 That's a very thoughtful question Cassie! I'll give my answer, but I don't want anyone to think that it is definitive. I would love to hear the thoughts of as many of you as possible, even (or especially) if, you don't
agree. To me charisma is connected to the notion of popularity. We see it every day in our own lives. Some people seem to have that intangible quality of being able to get people to listen, to be persuaded by their argument - even when the argument isn't necessarily grounded in logic or the truth. What these people have is hard to quantify, but we know it when we see it. Two people (or leaders) can have the same message, but one is able to persuade while the other doesn't. Beyond
this hard-to-pin-down personal quality, political leaders can also bring to bear propaganda and appeals to our baser instincts. The classic case is Leni Riefenstahl's Nazi film Triumph of the Will (look it up on YouTube, I don't want to link to it here). Of course it's not just bad guys. Look at King's "I have a dream" speech, JFK's first inaugural or Obama's 2004 Democratic convention speech. It's there, you can see it, but you can't quite put your finger on it's appeal. And of
course charisma is deeply connected to the intended audience (sound familiar?) The same speech in a different time and place will not resonate. What are your thoughts? Niara Pelton 15/2/2017 10:15:57 I agree with most of it. I think that charisma varies depending on the times and the temperatures.If people are cold and the times are cold, than someone hot, will appear charismatic, or vice versa. Charisma
depends on what people are going through. Because of the audience that he was appealing to, and their pride and anger, Hitler seemed charismatic to that particular audience, but to the audience of Obama's inaugural speech he would have just seemed fanatical and insane. Charismatic leaders are the ones who say what people want to hear at the time that they so desperately need to hear it. Bingham 12/2/2017 12:36:55
IMPORTANT!
I'm about half way through the DBQs (the comparative essays are posted). It occurred to me that I'll be posting the DBQs after the end of the marking period, and that it isn't reasonable to post a grade that might have a detrimental impact so late in the game. You know how to succeed if you want to on a test, but we've only done a few DBQs so far.
Anyway, I'll post the DBQ scores as the first grade in the next marking period.
Could you pass this along through FB, or
whatever? Cassie Barham 12/2/2017 12:43:21 I'll post this info in our facebook group right now. Thank you! Yasmeen Gaber 12/2/2017 20:36:42 In what ways did World War I mark new departures in the history of the twentieth century? *note: I sort of combined this with my SQW3R question "what were the legacies of WWI" 1.
trench warfare rose to prominence-->much larger casualties than usual-->social mobility for those who lived
2. authority of governments greatly expanded
3. propaganda depicted enemies as inhuman
4. suffrage movements revived themselves after the war
5. politics: Central European sovereign states emerged (Poland, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia) based on self-determination vis-à-vis Wilson
6. WWI-->Russian Revolution-->birth and rise of Communism
7. Downfall of the
Ottoman Empire including the Armenian Genocide and the creation of the modern map of the Middle East ft. mandates
8. Latin American economic spike with the war, fall at the end
9. Colonists who served in their mother country's military sought better treatment, more rights, and independence in the case of India
10. Japan's takeover in China-->rise of Chinese communism to defeat imperialism
11. USA became a global power Is this anywhere approaching good? Let me know
what to fix. Taylor Scott 12/2/2017 20:42:39 In what ways did World War I mark new departures in the history of the twentieth century? -"total war" requiring mobilization of each country's entire population
-"war socialism" policies, especially in the German state
-labor unions agreed to suspend strikes and accept sacrifices for the common good
-women replaced men in the factories and
temporarily abandoned the struggle for suffrage
-seemed to mock Enlightenment values of progress, tolerance, and rationality
-enormous casualties promoted social mobility
-a new consumerism encouraged those who could to acquire cars, washing machines, vacuum cleaners, electric irons, gas ovens, and other newly available products
-radio and movies now became vehicles of popular culture
-a new map of Central Europe emerged with new states based on the principle of "national
self-determinism"
-vast revolutionary upheaval in Russia that began the launch to world communism
-Germany lost its colonial empire
-Armenian genocide (although genocide was not yet a term)
-final decline of Ottoman Empire
-enduring struggle over ancient holy land between Arabs and Jews
-Latin American countries benefited from growing demand for their primary products (Chilean nitrates used in explosives)
-the end of war led to Chile mass unemployment, urban riots,
bloody strikes, and some appeal to Chilean Communist Party
-Britain publicly promised to put India on road to self-government
-brought the United States to center stage as a global power
-idea of League of Nations Taylor Scott 12/2/2017 20:43:15 srry...forgot to refresh Taylor Scott 12/2/2017 21:52:57 In what ways was
the Great Depression a global phenomenon? -banks closed
-many people lost their life savings
-world trade dropped by 62%
-loss of work (widespread unemployment and social tensions)
-stock prices were driven up with speculative stock market frenzy
-countries or colonies tied to exporting one or two products were hard-hit
-led to military takeover of the state in some places (ex. Latin America)
-import substitution industrialization policies
-some
authoritarian and intrusive governments emerged
-challenged the governments of industrialized capitalist countries
"democratic socialism"-sought greater regulation of the economy and a more equal distribution of wealth through peaceful means and electoral politics Taylor Scott 12/2/2017 22:16:00 In what ways did fascism challenge the ideas and practices of European liberalism and democracy?
-praised violence against enemies
-placed their faith in a charismatic leader
-condemned individualism, liberalism, feminism, parliamentary democracy, and communism
-suspended democracy
-disbanded independent labor unions and peasant groups as well as opposing political parties
-women were portrayed in highly traditional domestic terms
-generates a single-party dictatorship (as in Italy and Germany)
-viewed war as a positive and ennobling experience Hey. I was
questioning if I should add the point about celebrating action rather than reflection. What do you think? Taylor Scott 13/2/2017 10:08:33 What was distinctive about the German expression of fascism? What was the basis of popular support for the Nazis? Distinctive
-Nazis did not achieve national power until 1933
-intense German nationalism cast in terms of racial superiority, bitter hatred
for Jews, and determination to rescue Germany from the humiliating requirements of the Treaty of Versailles
-Jews became the symbol of the urban, capitalist, and foreign influences
-deeply antifeminist and resentful of the liberating changes that modern life had brought to European women
-state-sponsored system of brothels
-massive torch-light ceremonies celebrating the superiority of the German race and its folk culture
-drew heavily on "scientific racism"
-actively
rejected rationalism, tolerance, democracy, and human equality Support:
-German economy ground to a halt with massive unemployment among workers and the middle class
-Depression's terrible impact, and the Weimar government's inability to respond effectively
-appealed to rural and traditional values Coleman Harper 14/2/2017 18:31:48 I feel like for support, you should specifically state how the
Nazis openly opposed the Treaty of Versailles, which would have caused the public to see the Nazis as a solution to the inefficient government and Germany's status as a debtor nation. Taylor Scott 13/2/2017 10:46:32 How did Japan's experience during the 1920s and 1930s resemble that of Germany, and how did it differ? Resemble:
-limited experience with democratic politics
-moved toward authoritarian
government and denial of democracy in the 1930s
-launched an aggressive program of territorial expansion
-impact of Great Depression that paved the way for harsher and more authoritarian action
-shared extreme nationalism, hostility to parliamentary democracy, commitment to elite leadership focused around an exalted emperor, and dedication to foreign expansion
-erosion of democracy and the rise of the military Differ:
-participation in World War I was minimal
-economy grew considerably
-allied with winning side of democratic countries during World War I
-moved toward more democratic politics and Western cultural practices
-embraced the dignity of the individual, free expression of ideas, ans greater gender equality
-no right-wing party gained wide popular support
-no major fascist party emerged
-did not produce any charismatic leader
-people arrested fr political offenses were neither criminalized nor exterminated
(subjected to process of "resocialization" to renounce there "errors" and return to "Japanese way"
-military came to exercise a more dominant role in Japanese political life
-less repressive and more pluralistic society (Japanese intellectuals and writers retained some influence in the country)
-generals and admirals exercised great political authority- but they did not govern alone
-political prisoners were not subject to execution or deportation
-conceptions of their racial
purity and uniqueness were directed against foreigners Taylor Scott 13/2/2017 11:11:07 How was World War II differ from Wold War I? -most destructive conflict in world history
-new technologies of welfare- heavy bombers, jet fighters, missiles, and atomic weapons
-complete blurring of the traditional line between civilian and military targets
-new morality of total war
-governments'
efforts to mobilize their economies, their people, and their propaganda machines
-colonial resources were harnessed once again
-huge numbers of women into both industry and the military
-few women were inclined to directly challenge the practices of patriarchy immediately following the war
-women nor children could escape death and injury
-the Holocaust led to the definition of genocide
-fostered an enduring conflict in the Middle East
-rearranged the architecture of
world politics
-Asian and African colonies achieved independence (emboldened nationalist and anticolonial movements)
-consolidation and extension of the communist world
-dominant presence of the United States Taylor Scott 13/2/2017 11:19:27 How was Europe able to recover from the devastation of war? -rebuilt their industrial economies
-revived their democratic political systems
-apparent resiliency of an industrial society
-ability of the major Western Europeans countries to integrate their recovering economies
-leadership of the Western world passed to the United States
-Marshall Plan to rebuild and reshape European economies
-created unions for nations (ex. European Coal and Steel Community, European Economic Community, etc.)
-eventual adoption of the euro
-American commitment to Europe included political and military security (led to North
Atlantic Treaty Organization alliance) Eliza Pillsbury 13/2/2017 20:17:07 When Strayer talks about the new states formed after the collapse of the German, Russian, Austrian, and Ottoman empires, he uses the term "national self-determination". I found a definition from Wikipedia that basically says national self-determination is the principle that "territorial integrity" (the boundary lines determined by
major states) is not as important as the will of the people to choose their own state and its boundaries. I can see how this would be an emboldening concept in the aftermath of a huge empire's collapse, but I don't really understand how it is a realistic position to take. I'm sure my definition is a little wonky. Does anyone have any insight? Yasmeen Gaber 14/2/2017 11:31:45 In thinking about this,
the first thing that came to my mind was an old Daily Show segment with John Oliver where he plays a British colonialist drawing outlines for new Middle East states (Iraq, Syria, etc) following the Ottoman collapse. He draws the lines such that it has nothing to do with ethnic groups or social/religious divides. The lines here are important, yes, but the will of the people to choose their own boundaries would likely have resulted in a less contentious ethnic situation in the Middle East (see:
Kurds). As for realism, it is definitely a complex and international issue. Not every state could possibly have its borders appeased (see: Europe today); there will be conflict. But that struggle, according to the people who preached "national self-determination", is well worth it for the freedom of the people. Did that answer your question/make any sense at all? Yasmeen Gaber 14/2/2017 18:44:26
In what ways did Europe's internal conflicts between 1914 and 1945 have global implications? 1. Alliance system created obligations from various empires and their colonies to choose a side (Alliance or Entente) in WWI
2. occupied colonists fought for their mother countries in WWI-->rights and independence movements
3. West African cacao manufacturers were left dirt poor during the Great Depression
4. Hitler and Mussolini sought aggressive conquest in their fascist
regimes-->expansion into Eastern Europe/Soviet territory
5. US getting involved in WWI-->Europe owed the US much more than it could pay-->Great Depression hitting America and Europe even harder, US became Europe's primary creditor
6. End of WWI and Great Depression-->mass poverty in Latin America-->rise of Latin American dictatorships
7. Disillusionment with WWI-->rise of fascism in Europe-->creation of fascism in general
8. WWI and weakened Ottoman
Empire-->Armenian Genocide (supposed to be working for the Soviets) and downfall of the Ottoman Empire and creation of the modern map of the Middle East, including the mandate system
9.WWI-->Russian Revolution of 1917-->Bolsheviks take power and communism prevails as a major ideology
10. Holocaust-->Jewish diaspora to Israel-->Arab-Israeli conflict (still a thing)
11. Weakening of Western European colonial states/colonial disillusionment-->Japan gains a larger
sphere of influence in the Pacific Rim in the 1940s I'm just brainstorming here. Any additions welcome!! Yasmeen Gaber 14/2/2017 19:11:44 In what ways were the world wars and the Great Depression motors of global change in the history of the twentieth century? 1. WWI-->US became Europe's primary creditor
2. Aftermath of WWII-->Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe-->EEC-->European
Union, NATO (European alliance in general)
3. WWI, Treaty of Versailles, debt to US and reparations-->Weimar Germany failing-->rise of the Nazis by way of economic improvement-->Holocaust-->Jewish diaspora into Israel-->Arab-Israeli conflict
4. WWI-->ended imperial leadership of Germany
5. Involvement in both WWs and financial support-->US gains status as global superpower
6. Japanese takeover of China-->rise of Communist Party in China as victors against
Japanese imperialism-->1949 Cultural Revolution
7. Colonial involvement in WWI-->independence movements in India, Southeast Asia
8. WWI-->rise in nationalism-->national self-determinination-->new sovereign states in Europe This one stumped me a little, probably because it's so broad. Any suggestions? Leave a Reply.
| 
