20th+Century+Nationalism

1. Changes and Continuities

__Changes__

- Rise of new nations w/ new political governments. - Expansion of the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, and Russian empires. - Economic dominance shifted away. - Collapse of imperial dominance (//European//) and decolonization. - Superior and developing weaponry could lead to millions of deaths. - Technological advancements. - Staggering population growths. - Growing popularity of secularism. - Growing power of non-government regulated commercial alliances. - Environmental concerns (acid rain, global warming). - //Increased nationalism.// //- China became lead manufacturing nation.// //- Increase in education, new voice/rights for women.// //- Rise of U.S. + Russia.//

__Continuities__

- Same social system where aristocrats reigned until 21st century. - Economic inequalities due to lack of development of technology in rural regions. - Resistance to giving women more rights as males. - Attempts to combine the new with the old. - Attempts to retain past values and beliefs. - //Production of low-cost materials.//

2. Causes of World War I

- Imperialistic rivalries led to growing divisions between Triple Entente and Central Powers Alliances; fed the jingoism (warlike nationalist sentiments that spread widely among working + middle class throughout Europe). - Naval rivalries led to threats of power, cause of alliances. Military build-ups. - Serbian nationalist, Gavriel Princip assassinated **Archduke Ferdinand** in **Sarajevo**. Led to Austria-Hungary trying to assert power over Serbians/get them to give up their sovereignty. - Serbians refused; B/c Russia backed them up, other nations in Russia's alliance came to help as well. - Central Powers backed up Austria-Hungary. - Mobilization of armies led to outbreak of war. //- Germany's interest of power clashed with Britain.//

3. I See It Means Chart - "The Boiling Point" on the pot. - Pot that nations/representatives of those nations are trying to sit upon. - Five people representative of five different nations. - Steam/smoke is starting to come out of the pot. || - World War I was started on the basis of Balkan troubles; Austria- Hungary tried to take over their sovereignty, and when they refused, the Triple Entente came in. - Balkan troubles/problems were the climax before World War I; it was there that tensions which have been accumulating over the years from arms races and nationalism have exploded. - Perhaps it represents a lack of desire from other nations to enter a war at that point due to lack of resources and the like. Or that this war would severely damage their economies. - The five people most likely represented Russia, Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, and Britain. Three nations from the Triple Entente, and two nations from the Central Powers. The reason why Italy is not involved is due to relationship issues with Austria-Hungary from controlling most of Italy's territories. - Steam coming out probably means that tensions and relationship issues were already prevalent from the get-go; the Balkan problems probably accentuated that. ||
 * I See || It Means ||
 * - "Balkan Troubles"

5. Questions on 14 Points

- The introduction relates to the causes of WWI because it discusses on the "secret covenants" that certain governments have entered, a clear reference to the two alliances, the Triple Entente and the Central Powers. It was because of tensions between these two alliances, as well as the threat of power, that had triggered World War I. There was also an armaments limitation within the introduction that falls in the causes of WWI.

- Wilson suggests that the reason for American entry into World War I was because of violation of rights against the U.S. civilians and how they could not live their lives without this crisis being resolved. He claims that American entry was also because to regulate world peace and to stop global conflicts such as this.

- The main objectives of the 14 Points are to promote freedom and independence to certain countries, and ultimately, maintaining a scenario/situation where trade could occur even under war, with lowering of armaments and being able to freely trade with other nations despite hostilities.

- The colonies of Britain and France might be content with the free trade even during times of war, but they might find themselves discontent with their territories being up for grabs/being freed. This would mean that stronger powers could easily take over their lands/territories and enforce new laws and regulations upon the people living there.

__India Outline/Notes:__

MI: India had long sought for sovereignty and independence from England/Great Britain, as well as new economic and social rights. They sought to accomplish this not through fighting, but rather, peaceful lobbying. //(Revolutionary forces formed)// ++: The **National Congress party** was formed to promote the fight for independent rights and fair positions; mostly for elites and upper-class however, not the poor and/or middle class. ++: Tensions, however, grew when the Indians realized that they too were qualified for certain government positions but were denied due to European racism against them. ++: Right to independence movement grew in strength as Indians began to realize that they were more linguistically diverse, religious, and ethnic than Europeans were; nationalism power increased.

MI: India began to resent the economic costs that Great Britain were imposing on them due to a combination of competition with the U.S. and Russia, as well as favoritism towards British investors in India. ++: Indian leaders stressed on the "drain" that the British are doing to their natural resources; they believed that protection from Britain was not worth it cutting that deep into their natural resources. ++: British also used Indian resources and money in order to fund their armies, which the Indians were displeased at. ++: In addition to the economic costs, health issues were largely ignored by Great Britain, and they gradually got worse in the villages of India.

MI: Certain groups attempted to use violence against the British in response to the lack of economic and social rights. ++: **B.G. Tilak** used the power of mass demonstrations in the form of politics to try and advocate for these rights; however, radical Hindu beliefs and values, as well as underground terrorist connections failed his cause. ++: Other Hindu communalists used violence as a way to get their points across to the British, but the British easily put them down due to small numbers and limited support. ++: In the end, the removal of these terrorist groups actually helped to provide economic and social rights to the Indians with the **Morley-Minto reforms**.

MI: The prospects of gaining new legal rights and independence from Great Britain seemed likely, but soon backfired with later legislations. A new leader would rise up and fight for these rights in a passive-aggressive manner. ++: The **Montagu-Chelmsford reforms** increased the power of Indian legislators at all levels of the government, but was counteracted by the **Rowlatt Act** which placed severe restrictions on key civil rights. ++: **Mohandas Ghandi** rose as a new leader to protest against these injustices committed by the government. ++: Ghandi appealed to the masses with his moderate, passive-aggressive approaches he called **satyagraha.** //Motivations for Indian Independence:// //// //- Unfair Treatment by British.// //- Indian poverty and food shortagaes --> WWI// //- Indian Exposure to Western Education.// //- Self-determination.// //- Indian budget going to soldiers of England's armies.// //- British goes back on promises from WWI.// //National Congress// //--// //- High ranking in Raj.// //- Educated elite.// //Nationalists - Tilak// //-// //- Drastic.// //- Aggressive.// //- Alientated moderates.// //- Mass following.// //- Aware of threat from Brits.// //Ghandi// //-// //- Civil disobedience.// //- Non-violence.//

__**Leadership Analysis of Ghandi**__ [|Ghandi.doc] __**Identity Questions**__ - An identity is the unique personality, character traits, beliefs, values, etc, specific to one, single person. - Our identities are formed based upon our own experiences of the world, and how our beliefs, values, etc. shape those experiences into what we can take away from them. - Our identity influences we see other people because our own sets of values and beliefs that make up our identity affect how we see other people; whether we agree with their own sets or disagree. - Conformity is forcing oneself to accept other people's own sets of values and beliefs due to pressure of some sort. - A society can not determine who fits and who does not fit; everyone has their own unique sets and values that it is impossible to determine so. - Our attitudes and beliefs influence our thinking by making us believe what is best for own interests, whether that's self-interests or the interests of other people. - Belonging to a group means that one shares similar sets of beliefs and values as the rest of the group/people. - Membership is defined as having the right set of beliefs and values needed to be accepted within the group, and for the person, he or she needs to personally agree with the beliefs and values of that group before being granted membership.

[|Identity Map.docx]

- "Middle East"; name itself implies that the region it covers is in the center of the eastern hemisphere/portion of the world. - Process of elimination; can recognize which regions are part of other regions; ex. India would be considered part of Asia's sphere.

I got Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman as the correct regions of the Middle East; however, the -stan regions are not part of the Middle East, and I have forgotten to include Egypt in the Middle East as well. My misconceptions may have came from the media and how they portray certain nations as part of being the Middle East; that, combined with natural geographic location, has led to certain locations on my map being wrong.

VoiceThread comment: It seems that over the years, the Middle East is starting to lose more territory rather than gain it. Our present-day Middle East has less territory than when the Ottomans occupied it. Even in the future analysis/prediction of the Middle East, although some land is gained and added to the Middle East, the lands of major countries like Iran and Afghanistan have been decreased, and minor nations instead have grown in land, but not enough to grant them status as a major nation. This may actually be worse for the Middle East, as the major powers have weakened, and although the minor powers have grown, they are probably still weaker in power than the major nations despite the land loss. Why do we see the decrease in land in major nations and the increase in land for the minor nations in the Middle East? Is it because of rebellions/social unrest?

__Egypt:__ Outline Notes on Pg. 661 - 666 + 727 - 729:

MI: Egypt's nationalist movements, although initially weak at the beginning, gradually grew in strength over the years as British oppression and prejudice against them began to increase. ++: It was initially weak in the beginning due to the ayans benefiting largely from the British's new irrigation works, railways, and increasing orientation of Egyptian agriculture to the production of raw cotton for the export market. ++: Egyptian journalists were the key power in the rebellions against British rule; eventually, the ayans joined the movement due to the **Dinshawai incident**, which overall helped to unify Egyptians together against the British. ++: The drive for independence also grew in power and strength after World War I, similar to India.

MI: Both the Jewish Zionists and the Arabs were betrayed by the British after World War I as the British went back on their promises to give the Middle East (Palestine) to these people. ++: The **World Zionist Organization** was created to promote the migration of Zionists to Palestine so that a new Zionist state could be created there. ++: British attempted to limit these migrations, despite their previous word that they would allow Zionists to have control over the land. ++: The influx of Zionists angered the Arabs, who were also angered at the time by the British's betrayal of their promise as well. They were hostile towards the migrating Zionists, though in Palestine in particular, the Arab leaders there acted more in the interests of Syrian or Lebanese Arabs.

MI: Though the British eventually gave independence to Egypt after decades of effort and the formation of the **Wafd party** under the rule of **Sa'd Zaghlul**, Egypt was left in a crippled condition. ++: The British offered independence to Egypt provided that foreigners did not come to invade the nation, in which case, they would intervene. ++: Egypt suffered from bankruptcy, illiteracy, as well as concentrated power in the hands of only a couple individuals. ++: Reforms needed to resolve these issues were largely ignored.

MI: The Arabs and the Zionists Jews in the Palestine area continued to fight over land control even during and after the World Wars. ++: A large influx of Zionists came into the area due to Hitler's Final Solution; the U.S. and Britain did not wish to harbor these Jews at all within their own countries. ++: Muslim revolts broke out against the Zionists, but British forces stopped them from continuing. ++: The United Nations attempted to resolve the problem by partitioning the land, but that only sparked more fire to the tension between the Zionists and the Arabs; they were later engaged in a war, though the **Haganah** of the Zionists were better-equipped than the Arabs were.

__Pg. 798 - 801, 802 - 804__ MI: Revolutions involving the government could only be realistically enacted by military leaders due to their power and leadership, but once successful, these same military leaders failed to enact major reform changes to resolve the social and economic issues of Egypt. ++: The **Free Officers movement**, alongside the **Muslim Brotherhood**, were able to topple over the khedive Farouk after World War I when there was large discontent with the khedive. ++: Nasser, put in charge of ruling Egypt, failed to prevent the corruption of the bureaucracy and their intended land reforms with the aristocracy. ++: His successors, **Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak**, were slightly more successful by opening up Egypt to aid and investment from U.S. and Western Europe, but corruption could still not be controlled.

MI: Iran's revolution was intended to drive out Western influences and promote social and economic changes, however, their opposition against the West came back full force in the Iran-Iraq War, and their reforms backfired under a new radical leader. ++: **Ruhollah Khomeini**'s revolution drove out the shah that was ruling Iran and backed up by Western powers. Opposition to the shah originated from oppression of the religious leaders, merchants, and middle class people that the shah came to depend on for support. ++: With Khomeini as leader, he abolished Western influences which were deemed as satanic, as well as bringing in new radical leaders that would obey his every command. His reforms were cut short by the Iran-Iraq War. ++: The West fully backed up Iraq and Saddam Hussein in the war, and with Iran's inferior warfare technology, Iran easily surrounded, but not before tens of thousands of soldiers, men and boys, were killed.





- Iranian --> Based off of religion + fighting; Indians--> Mostly peaceful, based off of religious ideas/values. Cause of Iranian due to Zionist Jews entering into the Palestine region, conflict between the Arabs and the Jews; India had a peaceful leader, Ghandi, who stressed peaceful demonstrations to gain their rights. - Iranian --> Forced out outside influences, e.g. U.S. and France; believed them to be "satanic". Indians --> Did not completely force out British movements. - Iranian --> Sharp religious divisions (between Arabs + Zionists, as well as Shias and Sunnis) Result of radical beliefs, no moderation/accepting of other people's beliefs.; Indians --> Unification of its people. Due to Ghandi's more moderate beliefs and values.

__Beginnings of the Liberation Struggle in Africa__

MI: The liberation struggle for independence in Africa occured at first during World War I. Most of the riots, rebellions, and protests had leaders who were Western-educated and were knowledgable about the corruptions of the European powers and the liberties that they should have. ++: African villagers were not happy whatsoever that during World War I, their crops were being used not to feed themselves, but rather the armies of British's allies. ++: Major strikes and riots broke out from the lack of demands that the European powers promised to uphold. ++: African American political figures like **Marcus Garvey** and **W. E. B. Dubois** attempted to raise public support for **pan-African** organizations. They reached out initially for the African elites before going to the working class and lower classes. ++: **Leopold Sedar Senghor** argued for a more traditionalist point of view; that Africa's society pre-colonial times was far much successful in terms of treating their own people and their own values and beliefs.

__Liberation of Nonsettler Africa...__ MI: Independence was achieved for most of nonsettler African societies in a peaceful manner, through the works and actions of Western-educated leaders. ++: After World War II, European nations needed supplies and goods from the Africans; this allowed the leaders to argue for concessions and demands; this also helped to better their economic conditions, and saw population growth spurts in urban cities. ++: Nkrumah, in Ghana, created his own **Convention Peoples Party (CPP)** to rally the people for independence by using mass rallies, boycotts, and strikes. ++: Even Congo was able to gain its independnece with only 16 African college graduates amongst over 13 million Congonleses. By mid-1960s, the nonsettler African societies were free of European influence.

MI: Independence was still achieved in settler African societies, however, it was much bloodier than their nonsettler counterparts. ++: The large numbers of European settlers, who viewed the colonies as their own permanent homes, refused often initially to give the Africans civil rights or representation in administration. ++: Because of that, violence had to be used; the **Land Freedom Army** in Kenya used terror and guerrilla warfare to fight back against the British. Although they failed, England was willing to compromise with the Africans, and gave them back their independence. ++: Violence was also used in Algeria; **The National Liberation Front (FLN)** was in direct opposition with the **Secret Army Organization**, or Arabs/Berbers vs. the settlers/Arabs/Berbers who supported France. Eventually, the National Liberation Front faction achieved victory, and the supporters of France moved back to France.

MI: White supremacy was still evident in South Africa due to the extreme racism and prejudice of the Afrikaners against the local Africans who lived in that region. ++: The Afrikaners had to stay within that region in the first place due to it being their true home; unlike settlers from other regions of Africa, they did not have a European homeland that they could go back to. ++: By culminating into the **Afrikaner National Party**, the Afrikaners were able to win independence from England, and were able to then establish lasting white dominance over the political, social, and economic lives of the nation. ++: Police forces were implemented to prevent Africans from organizing themselves or doing mass demonstrations against the government for lack of representation and rights, otherwise known as the Apartheid.

__The Apartheid State and its Demise__

MI: South Africans rose up and rebelled against the Afrikaners who ruled over them; they created organizations, appointed their own leaders to represent themselves, and conducted actions for their own rights and liberation. ++: The cause of rebellion was due to unlawful segregation and denial of rights by the Afrikaners; the Africans resented this and began organizing their own movements, such as the organization, **African National Congress**. ++: They freed one of their leaders, Nelson Mandela, and began to conduct peaceful demonstrations for their rights. ++: The surrender of power by F.W. de Klerk's losing party suggested a coexistance between the two factions, but bitter ethnic rivalries between the two still existed between their people. Regardless, rights were gained for the South Africans, as Nelson Mandela became their first president.

Abdelhamid Ben Badis; Formed Islamic Reform movement; influence on Algeria's independence/politics. || Yes. || Fully gained on 11/11/75 || Portuguese. || Violent; Angolan War of Independence. || Golden Alvaro Roberto; Angolan independence leader who founded Angola's first nationalist movement. || Yes. || At first, nonviolent though. Riots, boycotts, strikes. || Nkrumah; eventually became first president after becoming a Republic. Strongly believed in independence. || Yes. || Ahmed Sekou Toure elected as president; Strong policy on Marxism. Made good relationships with other socialist nations. || Yes. || Jomo Kenyatta --> non violent approach; campaign of terror against British; wanted to unite tribes. || Yes. || Nelson Mandela; made first black president in 1994. Jacob Zuma; current president of South Africa. || Yes; rid system of apartheid. Africans gained political powers. ||
 * Nation || Date || Colonial Power || Nature of Movement || Key Leader(s) || Success? ||
 * Algeria || 1962 || French. || Violent; attacked French civilians. || Charles de Gualle; believed that there should be independence between Europeans and Muslims.
 * Angola || June 11, 1951, gained slight independence.
 * Belgian Congo || June 30, 1960 || Belgians. || Violent || Leopold II; free state of Congo. Before, Leopold promised to protect the natives from being Arab slaves. || Yes. ||
 * Ghana || March 6, 1957 || British. || Violent; there was looting involved.
 * Guinea || 1958 || French || Peaceful; through diplomacy. || Samoury Toure leads resistance to French occupation. Loi Cadre gives Guineans power to vote.
 * Kenya || December 12, 1963 || British || Peaceful; then violent. || Current president --> improve economy, combat corruption, improve constitution.
 * Madagascar || 1960 || France || Violent || Tsiranana; first president, helped bring Western ideas to Madagascar. || Yes; but struggled. ||
 * South Africa || May 31, 1910; declared republic on May 31, 1961 || Formerly 4 British colonies, Cape Colony... || Violent; started many guerilla wars against the British. || De Klerk; pushed for reforms to get rid of apartheid system.

Zimbabawe - Date: April 18, 1980. Colonial Power: British. Nature of Movement: Violent; fought for independence. Key Leaders: Canaan Banana; first president since independence. Robert Mugabe; successor of Banana. Success?: Yes.