Italian Unification Process Compared to German Unification Throughout the course of history, Italy and Germany were often considered to be pawns of the major European powers. This is because both regions were effectively divided into a series of city states. Each one had spheres of influence that impacted who were the most dominant. At the same time, countries such as: Britain, France, Spain and Austria Hungary were aggressively controlling territory inside both of them.

The result is that the people in these areas felt alienated and dominated by numerous foreign powers. As they would use these regions for their own self-interest. During the 1800s, nationalism became an ideal which would impact their future. This is significant, as both were heading down similar paths with colonial ambitions and a desire to become major world powers.

To fully understand the way this is occurring requires comparing the unification process of Italy and Germany. This will be achieved through carefully examining definitions and theories of Benedict Anderson, Ernest Gellner and Eric Hobsbawm. Then, there will be a focus on how this influenced unification. Together, these different elements will illustrate the way historical events had a direct impact on both.

The Definitions and Theories from Benedict Anderson, Ernest Gellner and Eric Hobsbawm

The events which unfolded in Italy and Germany were seen from unique historical perspectives. This is because there are various definitions and interpretations about what happened. The result is contrasting views about how this impacted a host of events in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

According Anderson (2006), both Italy and Germany experienced similar definitions of nationalism. This occurred with each nation wanting to unite as a single race of people under a common language, culture and identity. Historical events created more...

This led to attitudes that Germany and Italy should take their rightful place on the world stage.
These views became a part of a community of individuals who wanted to be united under one government. The result is there was a shift in attitudes, with anger and animosity directed at those forces which held them down. This is something that was passed on from one generation to the next.

As the late 19th and early 20th century attitudes, became some of the most common within both societies. In these situations, they believed that they were racially superior to others. This is based upon what they went through historically. Once this occurred, is when they felt that any actions were justified. This is from them thinking that the British, French, Russians, Austrians, Spanish and others engaged in behavior to advance their own interests. It was these beliefs which helped to ferment fascism.

Gellner (1988) argues that nationalism is the direct result of politics and ethnic identity. These two factors enabled the Germans and Italians to have a sense of closeness and understanding from embracing these attributes. Evidence of this can be seen with Gellner saying, "Nationalism only appeared and became a sociological necessity in the modern world. In previous times 'the agro-literate' stage of history rulers had little incentive to impose cultural homogeneity on the ruled. But in modern society, work becomes technical. One must operate a machine, and as such one must learn. There is a need for impersonal, context-free communication and a high degree of cultural standardization."

His theory believes that industrial societies must be able to create perpetual growth. This is designed to provide them with different types of skill sets and access to natural resources. Different nation states will have…