WWI

World War I, " the Great War," involved all of the great powers of Europe and killed more than eight million soldiers. Discuss the reasons which led to the rising international tensions that sparked World War I.

World War I was without question the biggest war of its time period. European powers allied with and against each other and the war killed millions of soldiers. Austria allied itself with Germany because of their ethnic ties, and allied with Italy because of their religious backgrounds. On the other side of the war, France, Great Britain, Russia, and Serbia allied together to fight the war. Serbian nationalists played a big part in the assassination of the Arch Duke of Austria which was a big reason for the tension leading to the war. Also, Britain was afraid that Germany had the potential to take some of their territory in other places such as Africa. Germany felt it had to join the war because it was impossible for them to stay out. Due to the many reasons for international tension, World War I was inevitable, but the biggest reason that started the War so quickly was the assassination by the Serbs.

The war started as a war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia before it became a World War. The Austrians felt that they needed to protect themselves through war according to the telegram that declared the beginning of the war, " the Austro-Hungarian Minister of Belgrade, the Imperial and Royal Government are themselves compelled to see to the safeguarding of their rights and interests, and, with this object, to have recourse to force of arms (Doc. 7)." This declaration of was was due mainly to the assassination of the man in line to be Duke of Austria.

Serbia pulled Russia into the war so Austria was forced to turn to its ally, Germany. An agreement between Germany and Austria said, " one of the two Empires be attacked by Russia the High Contracting Parties are bound to come to the assistance one of the other with the whole war strength of their Empires (Doc. 1)." Therefore Germany had to join the war at some point. They felt Russia did not readily have the troops available, but would get them if given time. They also knew France would ally with Russia and join the war, so the attacked France hoping Austria would take care of Russia. Instead, Austria focused on the Serbs and were defeated at their first battle.

The Germans and Austrians knew they needed another alliance to have a chance in the war, so they turned to Italy to create "The Triple Alliance". The alliance itself said, "In case Italy, without direct provocation on her part, should be attacked by France for any reason whatsoever, the two other Contracting Parties shall be bound to lend help and assistance with all their forces to the Party attacked (Doc. 2)". All of these European powers were being recruited by the Austrians and Serbs, over a war the started because of the Ferdinand's death. What scared Great Britain into the war was Germany's hunger for more power. Erye Crowe wrote, "Germany distinctly aims at playing on the world's political stage a much larger and much more dominant part than she finds allotted to herself under the present distribution of material power (Doc. 4)". At the time, Britain was the biggest economic power in the world, the biggest target for Germany to take from.

Meanwhile, the Serbs were cooking up something important of their own. The Black Hand was an organization that, "prefers terrorist action to intellectual propaganda (Doc. 6)". Serbia and Austria were not the most powerful players in the war, but they were the mastermind's behind the scene. They assembled their allies and created the World War through their own problems with each other. Communications between Berlin and St.Petersburg took place during the war saying, "The unscrupulous agitation which has been going on for years in Serbia, has lead to the revolting crime of which Archduke Franz Ferdinand has become a victim (Doc. 8)". This shows that the all throughout the war people knew what had started the war. There had been agitation between the Serbs and Austrians, but the murder of Ferdinand brought it all to a head and sparked the war. The war could not have been entirely avoided, but would have started later and had less of an effect on everyone involved if this murder never took place. Therefore, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the biggest contributing factor to World War I.

DBQ

During the second half of the nineteenth century, Europe went through transformations. The changes affected the working middle class the most of any people in Europe. In figure 1, a women is breast feeding her child in public. In earlier times, this never would have been painted. Classical nudes were the only accepted naked paintings by the majority of the population. Pictures such as this caused and uproar of emotions from people who viewed it. In figure 2, the painting is not a close up of people. In the back of the painting, people are walking around with their backs to the viewer. This was another change during the second half of the nineteenth century. New ways a painting were just a small portion of the changes going on. Socialism was coming about during this period. People like Karl Marx had ideas for a better life style for middle class people. The idea of Socialism was a good idea to create a perfect society; but a society cannot be perfect full of imperfect people. Different biases about ideas during this time stopped Socialism from being successful. During the second half of the nineteenth century, transformations were prominent. Transformations in art and culture help society grow; but things such as Socialism led to radical new ideas that bettered the present but worsened the future.

In the 19th century, middle class people were over worked and under appreciated. They were also underpaid, with the minority of the population having the majority of the money. Marx thought this was backwards and wanted to transform society. He wanted a society where everyone was even. This is the idea of Marxism, a subsection of Socialism, with slightly different ideas. This idea would take affect on the middle class the most. The majority of people in Europe were a part of the middle class, yet they took orders from the smallest group of people. In a factory there is one owner in charge of numerous workers. If all the workers came together for a common good, they could over throw the factory worker that took advantage of them. This is the idea of Marxism. The idea was good for the moment, but over time turned into a nightmare. After the middle class came together as one, somebody had to become the leader of the group. This brought everyone back to square one. Without a leader, the group will have no direction and fail. With a leader, people will always be unhappy and want more for themselves.

Other transformations took place within the culture of European society during this time period. The art work before this time had been about nobility and religion. Now, people were beginning to paint things everyone could relate to. Figure 2 has middle class people walking around in a town. A simple painting that spoke volumes to the people at the time. Paintings of Kings and Queens, Gods and Goddesses could not be related to the average person. The working class was thought of at some points as uncultured, but that was because culture failed to include them. The transformation of art types opened new cultural doors for people. They were suddenly interested in art because at any point in time, they could substitute themselves into the scenes. This helped to bring the people of the middle class even closer together. This had its advantages and disadvantages. And advantage would be a more cultured society. A large disadvantage would be more people coming together to accept things such as Socialism, which cannot work in society.

The culture of Europe definitely had been changed forever by these new ideas. People bought into the ideas because at the time they seemed like a good thing. But bad came out of the ideas also. People were killed in mass numbers in something called "the bloody June days". This was a scary time where revolution again tried to change culture more than it needed to be changed. The change in culture through art was an advantage and helped people come closer together. Things like Marxism and Socialism tried to do the same, but on a more radical level. Like the radical Jacobins of the French Revolution, their ideas were not successful.

Romantics free response

To what extent did Romanticism challenge Enlightenment views of human beings and the natural world and how did this challenge illustrate changes between the Enlightenment and Romantic views of the relationship between God and the individual?

During the Enlightenment period, human beings viewed the world with the words of religious leaders in their minds. When Romanticism started, people began to focus on more natural ways of looking at the world. Individuals thought more of their own feelings rather than the feelings they were told to have by their God. Romantics thought more of the spirit of the human person in an Earthly life, focused on all the feelings that rush into a persons mind and body. This was a new way of thinking that became popular through out society. Some Romantics were extremely popular because of the new way of thinking about life and religion that they imposed on society. Romanticism challenged Enlightenment views of the human person and natural world by going against the traditional way of thinking that personal feelings and imagination needs to be suppressed for the public; furthermore showing that a life lived through feelings and imagination can be more satisfying than a life lived through God.

Shelly was a Romantic poet during this time period and challenged Enlightenment views in his works. He went after other women while he was married to another women, something that was frowned upon. He expressed his choice by saying that there is no God, no Heaven, and no Hell, therefore the choices made in life should satisfy a person in the present, not looking forward to the future. This contrast the Enlightenment way of thinking where everything was done for a specific reason that was thought about for a period of time. Romantics did not think, they felt with their emotions and dreamed with their imaginations to make choices that pleasured them during their life span.

Romantics did not need a greater being to look up to, to realizes their purpose in life. They searched deep within their soul to find the meaning they personally had for their life. Lord Byron was very popular during his time, especially with women. He was a dark, mysterious character that used his poetry to heighten the senses of others and himself. He found the meaning of his life not through God, but through his popularity. During the Enlightenment, nobody had ever thought like this, and life was more secluded. Bryon along with other Romantics opened the doors to new ways of life. New ways of life broke up the monotony of daily life, making an imaginative life more fulfilling for many. A belief in God was no longer needed, as people were realizing that they were satisfied by paying attention to feelings the experienced through nature and life itself.

Not all Romantics thought of life the same way, but all knew the importance of emotions. Enlightenment ideas were nearly all the same with no originality at all. Even the music during more classical periods had a specific formula to make it work. Art and music during Romanticism was more appealing to many because it told a story. Romanticism was something people could easily relate to, because it was within themselves, where as during the Enlightenment, people went by what they were told, not by what they felt. The people of the Enlightenment really knew nothing, they only learned what they were told. Romantics knew everything the wanted to know, because they learned it from their inner spirit.

Romanticism changed the view of people on the natural world and religious world. People now had an idea of independence and originality that was not present before this period. People were no longer afraid to try new things, allowing new discoveries and ideas to come about and enhance society. A life through emotions and imagination proved to be sufficient to make the people on the fringes of society feel more certain of their existence. Romanticism challenged the views of the Enlightenment but was able to put its own stamp on the way of life.

Egypt/France

1. Compare / Contrast Louis XVI and Mubarak. The same- Both of them were taken out of power due to a revolution. Both had complete political power; Mubarak a dictator and Louis XVI an absolute monarch. Both had violent riots break out against them during their reign. Louis appointed his friends that were nobles into places of power around him as Mubarak kept his friends in high positions also. Differences- Louis did not attempt help the economy of France but Mubarak tried to help the economy. Louis was executed but Mubarak was just thrown out of power. Louis XVI did not allow others to run for power, Mubarak ran in elections with other but won them all.

2. In each case, WHY were the people protesting? (Cite primary sources). In the French Revolution, people were protesting mostly because of unfair taxes. The third estate, or common people, were the only estate being taxed, and they were the estate with the least money. The other two estates were the clergy and nobility and neither had to contribute to the lessening of the countries debt. The third estate, the largest estate, joined together to revolt against the first two estates.

- http://sourcebook.fsc.edu/history/constitutionof1791.html

- http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1791degouge1.html

- http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/turgot/reflecti

- http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1789platiere.html

In Egypt, Mubarak had been suppressing the rights of the people. He had become a dictator and outlawed and protesting against his reign. He used to the military to protect himself from riots and shut down ways of communication for Egyptian people such as the Internet. The People had enough and began to protest and he stepped down.

- http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/egypt

- http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2011/02/10/live-blog-feb-11-egypt-protests

- http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/02/11/133675132/live-blog-latest-on-events-in-egypt

3. What role did women play? In France, women were still unable to receive and education and had limited rights. Women joined together and revolted against their oppression. Improvement were seen in small steps, especially after The Declaration of the Rights of Women was published. Women in the Revolution did not play a huge role but instead gained rights from the years after the Revolution itself. In Egypt, there are a large amount of women activists protesting in the streets along side the men. Women had been abused by governmental people which added to their list of reason to revolt. There were women's rights groups established and still being established now.

4. What concerns are their about the current situation in Egypt? How might they relate to the days following the fall of Louis XVI? One concern is that some of the people have reported on twitter that they now will stop protesting to rebuild the government and economy. The concern is that the Vice president and military may take full power and a new dictatorship will arise. This can relate to days after the fall of Louis XVI because people did not want a new absolute monarchy to rise. A new absolute ruler did come about in Robespierre and the Terror took place. After it all blew over, the Republic failed and an Emperor came to power.

5. How did/are people express(ing) their views? In both Revolutions, the common people revolted because they felt under appreciated and taken advantage of. In Egypt people marched around the presidential palace, burned buildings, and refused to stop until Mubarak stepped down, and he finally did. In France, the third estate created the National Assembly, protested violently with guns, marched on Versailles, and attended the Estates General when they were banned from it.

6. Are the current protests violent? Yes, the protests are violent in Egypt are violent. Buildings have been burned and large fights have broken out. To try and maintain control the military has been using weapons, bombs, and fire to keep protestors back up until the resignation of Mubarak. The people gathered in an unusually large amount and stormed one of Cairo's major squares.

7. What do people on the ground in Cairo think is going to happen now? (Directly contact reporters and bloggers in Egypt via Twitter during this class period). People are excited that the Revolution got Mubarak out of power and are rejoicing. Reporters are saying that an election will be held for a new president, but until then, the vice president will reign with military aid. I was unable to come in contact with anyone at the scene, put from generic posts this is what I was able to find.

8. Based on your study of the French Revolution and your current observations of the situation in Egypt, what do you think are possible outcomes? How are the possible outcomes in Egypt alike or different with outcomes in France -- both in the short and long term. I think that a possible outcome is that the Vice President will take control and become a dictator as Mubarak was and as Robespierre was a absolute ruler in the French Revolution. He will become power hungry and the Revolution will have to try and force him out of office as they had with Mubarak. This will cause more violence and protests along with turmoil for the entire country as the Terror did in France.

Terror Thesis

Maximilien Robespierre's radical oppression of the public's ideas, such as the gathering of women and any opposition to the French Revolution during his Reign of Terror, caused the French Republic to fail, leading to the rise of an Empire in France.

Term Paper

The Terror

Results from Page 134-136

14/20