Changing Tides in Germany

This week we talked about one of the most devastating events in world History, the Holocaust. Since its occurrence over sixty years ago, many people have asked how the majority of the German population could have been seduced into compliance with the government to go against the Jewish people who had resided in the country for so long. Before the laws began to develop against the Jewish people living in Germany, before the boycotts of their shops and the elimination of kosher meat, many Germans had close relations with Jews. In one of the articles we read for class this week, it discussed how, almost overnight, many Jewish people suffered the loss of their friends and neighbors. Although it is hard to believe how so many individuals could turn their backs on people they had known for so long, the explanation for why it occurred can be quite simple.

In my sociology class, we discussed how strong an individual’s need for conformity is. In one experiment we discussed, a sociologist gathered a group of people into a room together and had them answer a series of relatively simple questions. He implanted a person into the experiment and had him purposely deliver a wrong answer on several of the questions. In many instances, the other people in the group would also give wrong answers after hearing his response. Even though their was only one obvious answer, they felt as though they could possibly have been missing something that this man clearly saw because he gave his answers with such confidence. It was noted that even the people who would give the right answers gave so with an uneasy stature, feeling unsure about going against most of the group.

During the boycott of Jewish stores, many Germans remained loyal to the Jewish owners. However, as the boycott continued and more Germans began to stray away from their involvement with the Jewish residents, even those who had remained loyal in the beginning soon followed suit. Exceptions did of course exist. Some Germans cut ties to keep their Jewish friends safe as well as themselves from the harassment inflicted by other Germans. Despite the exceptions, conformity did lead a large group of human beings away from any sense of humanity. Conformity occurs everyday in our society, but the events that occurred in Germany over sixty years ago can show how dangerous it can become when taken to an extreme.

My Thoughts on Fascism

What does it mean to be Fascist? It is a good question, and one that is not answered with a few words as mentioned in class on Thursday. The problem with Fascism is that there are no clear-cut lines that dictate what it is. There is no book like how the communist base their ideas on. Democracy is based on individualism and freedoms. Where communism and democracy are opposites, I would say that Fascism is still the opposite of both ideas. I believe Fascism is an idea that is resorted to when democracy does not seem to work and when communism is not wanted. In certain places, democracy does not always work. As much as we hate to admit, it may not have the response time of that of an authoritarian government. Democracy is in no ways a perfect system, but there is no perfect system, and it is the best alternative. Democracy has always been plagued with getting locked up, and then becoming ineffective. The good and bad thing about Fascism is that there is no set definition. I think that helps make it so appealing to people. Hitler and Mussolini were able to adapt it to how they wanted to come to power. This is the appeal to Fascism. The negative aspect of Fascism is that there is no set rules or ideas. This allows the rulers to decide to do whatever they want in the name of Fascism. When you have a great orator like Mussolini or Hitler, it is easier to sway people to your side and get away with things that are wrong.

I also understand how people can get swept up in the Fascist movement. An example of people getting swept up in the modern world is when Obama ran for office. He did not have the qualifications of McCain. He had only been in the Senate for a short time. The thing that was appealing about him was that he was something different and new. People were not happy with the current system, and they wanted to something new. Obama was young and “cool” where as McCain was old and stodgy. This could be compared to that of what was going on Germany. Hitler was young and “cool” and the former chancellor was an older, suit wearing man as mentioned in class today. I am not saying that Obama and Hitler have anything in common. I am just saying that their rise to power is similar. Hitler had the overwhelming support of the youth in Germany, as did Mussolini in Italy. In Clarke County, a college area with a large youth population gave overwhelming support to Obama despite the way the rest of Georgia voted. When people are dissatisfied with their current government they tend to go in the opposite direction of what they didn’t like. Obama was the complete opposite of Bush, and Fascism is the complete opposite of democracy.

Thoughts on World War I

Today, we discussed World War I. I believe this war only occurred as a means for Germany to show how strong it was and as a catalyst to unite the people of their country. I believe that Germany being a fairly new country did not get the recognition that it deserved. They believed that they were stronger than the countries of Great Britain and France, who they felt looked down on them. This war was primarily to show that Germany deserved recognition.

I do not believe that the Germans particularly hated the French or the British. I believe the French hated the Germans for all the crimes the Germans committed against them and also the destruction the war had caused the French countryside. I believe that there was really no hatred for the Germans by the British.

Based on the readings we had, I do not feel that there were any bad feelings between the British and the German soldiers. They both were simply obeying orders. World War I was unlike World War II because in the Second World War, hatred was mutual between Germany and the countries they were fighting against. But, in World War I, I believe that a British soldier would have given water to a dying German and the German would have done the same for a British soldier. In one of the letters that an English soldier wrote home, he said that at times they preferred to speak to the German prisoners rather than their French counterparts. I do not believe this to be true during World War II. Also, in the story of Christmas day, where the German and British soldiers agreed not to fire a shot shows that they were not holding resentment towards these men. In World War II, the battles were much more heated, not by mere obligation, but revulsion.

I also believe that the German soldiers on the front lines did not want to use chemical warfare on the British and the French. They were forced to. I believe that the war would have been more civilized if it had not been led by the aristocrats. I believe the aristocrats were willing to do whatever it would take to win and show that Germany was superior to Great Britain and France. I believe this war was one of the last wars that was fought with dignity by both sides. I believe this, like many other wars, was decided by the rich and fought and died by the poor.

I believe the reason there were so many deaths in this war was not because the soldiers were improperly trained, but because the commanding aristocracy was not properly trained, and they also would not admit when they were wrong. I believe the best commanders work their way up; they do not start out at the top. The reason is because they have no true experience, and they have no idea how the conditions truly are and what it takes to be successful in battle. They also do not know the true value of life. Some one who fought in the front lines knows this value, and would never do anything that would put their soldiers in harms way. However, the aristocrats do not know this value; they just want to win. They see soldiers as chess pieces.

Thoughts on the Class Material

While studying for our first test, I looked over the notes and realized how much information we have gone over. I have 18 pages front and back of notes. When we first started the class we started with the Protestant Reformation in 1517. The last day before the test we discussed social and political issues of the 1860s and 1870s. During this time we have learned a lot of in-depth information about European history and how it has changed.

Before the class, I did not know that much about European History unless it pertained to US History. Looking over French history, I am really surprised that the American Revolution went so well. Comparing it to the multiple French Revolutions, it was far more successful. After the French Revolution, the people of France could not agree on anything, and it led to tyranny. On the contrast, when the American Revolution occurred, the people did not agree on solution, but there was compromise. This I believe prevented rebellions or tyranny.

I believe that Britain had a more stable government than France because it had a constitutional monarchy as opposed to an absolute one. I believe that the French monarchy was too short sighted to see that they were going to lose power one way or another. The British monarchy realized that the people wanted power and were going to revolt to get it if needed. The French Monarchy was too stubborn to take the example of their hated enemy, the British, to see how well it worked for them. I believe the French monarchy thought they were better than the British monarchy and that they would never lose control.

I think that discussing the different reasons of war for multiple countries during the class was interesting. At the beginning of the semester, people fought wars or had rebellions to have the right to practice religion in they way they saw fit. By the time of the first test, wars had mainly been fought for political power, or they were fought for land.

People’s attitudes also changed during this time. At the beginning of the semester, common people’s worries were about whether they should be Catholic or Protestant. This changed many times. Once it changed to having concerns over taxes. This leads to wanting political power, which leads to end of serfdom. Along with the agricultural and industrial revolutions, it became mainly concerned for their family and being able to feed them.