Italian Unification Process Compared to German Unification Process

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 anger and animosity that was directed at those forces which were trying to hold them back. 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 overlapping areas where they are competing for natural resources and access to them. To maintain the status quo, a state's survival will depend upon creating policies that combines nationalism with culture.

In the case of Italy and Germany, the conflicting areas of interest meant that they were often short changed. This created a situation where their economies cannot consistently grow. While other nations, are able to exploit these areas and take advantage of them. A good example of this can be seen with Alsace Lorraine. This is where both Germany and France had fought over a specific region in order to control its natural resource and industrial base. Whoever occupied it, could utilize its resources to help their nation to grow. Germany and Italy felt that they could not compete, as they were effectively muscled out. In response to these challenges, both combined nationalism with socialism to support the views that their borders needed to be expanded.

Hobsbawn (1999) is arguing that nationalism was a basic definition which is utilized to illustrate how patriotism and political units should be combined together. At the same time, he felt that a group has a right to statehood. These insights were used as justification in understanding how nations are able to evolve over the course of time.

According to Hobsbawn, he believes that popular sovereignty is when the state and people become one. When this happens, nations will begin to exercise greater amounts of control on the national stage. This has occurred throughout the course of history with the British often engaging in actions that supported their own self-interest. In order to achieve these objectives, they often enslaved and brutalized various segments of society in their colonies. Society became a part of this, by supporting these ideas of nationalism and helping to expand it. Over the course of time, these aligned attitudes enabled the British to dominate various regions of the world and exploit natural resources for their own benefit.

In the case of the Germans and Italians, they experienced similar shifts as nationalism is combined with sociological principles. These ideas became a part of both countries and were used to justify the various actions against the civilian population centers in order to reach these objectives. As a result, the activities of other world powers served as a blue print for justifying how the Germany and Italy responded to them by wanting to realize similar rewards. Once the two were integrated, is when these ideas became a reality and their actions were justified (from the perspective of ordinary society).