“Patriotism is the belief your country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.”
— George Bernard Shaw
With World Cup fever overtaking the globe, it is interesting to see the rise of patriotism in people, including me, who rarely go about flag-waving and chanting “U-S-A.” It’s an interesting look into who we are as people and a remnant of something tribal within us. But while patriotism and nationalism can be great and honorable things at times, it also has a negative side — one which has caused some of the greatest mass slaughters in human history.
On June 28, 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary, was assassinated by Gavrilo Princip, a Yugoslav nationalist. What followed was one of the bloodiest conflicts in human history, with over 16 million deaths and 20 million wounded.
In a world in which the United States sees far fewer casualties despite being perpetually at war, the idea that 16 million people could march to their deaths in a span of four years is simply unfathomable. But the reasons for which so many fought and died are still very much a part of our world. And while I am optimistic enough to hope it won’t happen again in my lifetime, I am not so naive as to believe it can’t happen.
The Great War in 1914 did not simply begin because of an assassination of an Austro-Hungarian royal. The archduke’s killing was just the final spark that set off the dynamite. The fuse had been burning for the previous 100 years, and while the flame had been doused at times, Ferdinand’s death ensured the fuse would be lit again with a flamethrower.
The story of World War I is not just the story of an assassination and entangling alliances. It is the story of the overwhelming power of nationalism — of the belief in national self-rule, of the belief in British exceptionalism, of the belief in American ideals and the inevitable triumph of democracy. In short, millions died because they believed their nations stood for something greater, and they were willing to fight for that.
The story begins in the 18th century, when a little-known soldier from Virginia named George Washington got into a scrap with French soldiers in what today is called Pittsburgh. The actions started the French and Indian War, which ended with Great Britain in control of vast new territories in Canada but in substantial debt. The Brits asked their American colonies to pay more in taxes, which sparked a long debate about the right of a free people to choose their own representatives. It ended with a war.
In declaring themselves free, however, the American colonists also declared that “all men were created equal.” The American cause spread to France, and soon, the French overthrew their own government and proclaimed liberty, equality, and fraternity. French nationalism became the new order of the day. No longer was a citizen identified as Corsican or Norman or Parisian — he was simply a Frenchman. The French Revolution, despite its high ideals, ended with the installation of a new emperor: Napoleon Bonaparte.
Napoleon spent the next few years conquering much of the European continent, and despite the fact that he was now a French monarch, he spread the ideals of the French Revolution. Napoleon created small républiques based on national identity, including the Kingdom of Italy, the Duchy of Warsaw, and the Confederation of the Rhine. For the first time, many of these peoples were coming to terms with the idea of ruling over themselves like the Americans and the French. The idea of nationalism came into vogue.
Most of these new nations were split up following Napoleon’s defeat and the Congress of Vienna. Reactionary forces were determined to maintain the status quo. That meant returning nations to their former masters and reinstalling the king of France. An example could not be set that it was OK to overthrow a monarch.
The Congress of Vienna’s goal was to maintain what they called the Balance of Power. Similar to the philosophy which kept world powers in a Cold War for half a century, the Balance of Power philosophy stated that no nation on the European continent should gain enough power to be able to crush the other Great Powers. The Great Powers, which included Great Britain, Russia, Prussia, Austria, and France, would act as checks on one another, with their strength being so equal that war between the Powers would be too deadly and costly. As an added bonus, the Powers would be expected to help one another out when any pesky ethnic minorities decided they wanted to pass their own laws.
That agreement came in handy in 1848, when numerous nationalistic groups tried to spark their own revolutions. The French were successful, ending the French monarchy and creating the French Second Republic, which was headed by Louis-Napoléon, who, of course, became emperor a few years later. Other nations were less successful.
The Austrian Empire faced the greatest threat from nationalism. The empire included Austrians, Hungarians, Slovenes, Slovaks, Ukrainians, Poles, Czechs, Croats, Romanians, Serbs, and Italians. Each ethnic group included those who hoped to either achieve autonomy or independence. Further complicating things were the Germans, who, like the Italians, were seeking national unification.
Within the next two and a half decades, both Italy and Germany would achieve their nationalist goals through war, bribery, and realpolitik. The unification stories of both nations were intertwined and helped to set the stage for World War I.
Italian unification began with the Congress of Vienna and ended in 1871, when Rome was named the capital of the united Italy. Rome was taken by the Kingdom of Italy in a victory against the Papal States when Louis-Napoléon, now known as Napoleon III, had to remove troops so that they could be used in a fight with Prussia. Italian unification set off a wave in Europe and created a sixth Great Power, offsetting the balance that was created in Vienna.
Prussian Chancellor Otto von Bismarck was no nationalist, but he understood power and understood how to manipulate the population. By provoking a war with Napoleon III and the Second French Empire, Bismarck knew he would be able to persuade the smaller German states to side with their brother countries. The Franco-Prussian War began and quickly ended with France’s humiliation. In the end, Napoleon III was removed from power, Alsace-Lorraine was ceded to Prussia, and the German states united under Prussia’s King Wilhelm to form the first German Empire. The loss of Alsace-Lorraine wounded France’s pride, and the country was determined to win the rematch, whenever that day came. The unification of Germany also offset Europe’s Balance of Power, upsetting Great Britain, which began an arms race with the Germans.
German unification was technically not complete, however. The Austrians were also a Germanic people, but as rulers of their own empire, which included many belligerent ethnic minorities, they had no desire to promote the nationalism that was making Germany strong. Still, their shared desire to avoid war with Russia led to the Dual Alliance of 1879.
Austria in the beginning of the 20th century was in the midst of political turmoil driven by nationalism. In 1882, Serbia proclaimed its independence from the Ottoman Empire, which, like the Austrian Empire, contained many disparate ethnic groups. Ethnic Serbs in Austria, as well as other Slavic peoples, desired to be rid of their Austrian overlords and wished to unite with their brother country. Austrian leadership was torn on how to handle Serbia, with Franz Ferdinand, ironically, maintaining a dovish stance toward the country. The biggest reason for Austria to stay out of Serbia, however, was that Russia considered itself to be the protector of this smaller Slavic country.
And thus the stage was fully set for a World War. Yugoslav nationalists, including Bosnians and Serbs, were sick of being dictated to by the Austrian aristocracy and the Congress of Vienna. A small group of militants chose to do as Washington would do and fight for their freedom. Ironically, they killed their best ally in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the aging monarch took action against a country that had been a thorn in his side.
By attempting to crush Serbia, Austria provoked Russia, which stirred German nationalism into a frenzy, causing the young empire to mobilize for war. Germany went to war again with France, which was looking for an excuse for a rematch to take back Alsace-Lorraine. France, which was yet again a Republic, had sided with the other prominent republic in Europe, Great Britain, in a Triple Entente with Russia. Thus, German aggression provoked Great Britain and Russia, which was already involved to protect Serbia. Oh, and Germany then signed a pact with the Ottoman Empire in the midst of this, bringing the dying empire of the east into the battle as well.
But what about the United States? Well, American nationalism has always been a bit different than that of their European counterparts. Even in the early 20th century, American ethnicity was not really clear-cut. Immigrants had come to the United States from all over Europe and were becoming part of a nation that already included immigrants from China and the descendants of slaves from Africa. American identity became less about a common history and more about a common philosophy.
That philosophy was democracy, and even though it’s debatable how truly democratic the United States has been at various points in history, it was something the country believed was worth fighting for. Thus, with France and Great Britain being pushed by the empires of Europe, it became necessary as an extension of American nationalism to join the war. After all, the world had to be made safe for democracy.
Sound familiar? Remember this the next time you are watching the World Cup and cheering for the U.S. of A., while CNN is explaining why we may be entering Iraq for the third time in as many decades. Nationalism can be a great thing, but it may also lead to the downfall of society. Appreciate what makes us different, but don’t let it divide us to the point of destruction. After all, the end of humanity is in no one’s national interest.