It seems an unavoidable conclusion that two things were happening in regards to Prussian Militarism. One was that Kaiser Wilhelm, a monarch (who by their nature are always leading lives filled with pomp and circumstance) may have suffered from cognitive dissonance as is suggested by Howard, but it was hardly a situation of mind that the monarchy achieved alone or suffered from alone. The military arm was large and maintaining that kind of military for so long requires a great deal of nationalism. Plus, as Howard argues, "Bismark himself, having created the German Empire, had been content simply to preserve it, but the successor generation was not so easily satisfied. It had every reason to be ambitious," (9). Such an army is maintained not by the will of a monarchy alone. Bismark created an empire with that army. It would seem unreasonable to think that the army would be content to maintain the empire. This was an army meant to war and build empires, and such an army is made to war. The highly intense stakes regarding warfare were well established. Could that also produce a sort of a manic state of longing for a war and played a huge factor in World War I? Can the argument be made that such a situation requires a war? After all, war was expected through the previous generations of both the monarchy and the military.
Howard, Michael. The First World War: a Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2007.
Comments
Reece McQueen
Thu, 08/23/2018 - 07:30
Permalink
In relation to the argument
In relation to the argument that societies founded upon militarism will remain as such, even in times of peace, I have found myself to be in complete agreeance. Early 20th century Germany is an excellent example of a society created in conjunction with a military, which used said military to do its international political bidding, that was unable to shed the ingrained ideas of militarism. Throughout European history, there have been a myriad of countries that have suffered the same fate as Germany and became driven by militaristic thought. However, when it came to 20th century Europe, Germany was not alone in this endeavor. A large majority of European countries began to ingrain the idea of militarism in their people, which only exacerbated the existing political tensions. The statement you present here, "armies created only for war will only war," makes a valid point. The development of militaristic thought in 20th century European countries not only caused one world war but two and plunged the region into a near permanent state of warfare.