So I was digging around some weird ideologies for my timeline, and I found this one called "nationalism," basically the gist of it is that people who are linguistically, culturally, and ethnically similar should unite under their own state. Like, a german empire other than the HRE or a slavic nation taking up the western Balkans. Obviously, this didn't take off too much otl- I don't think Austria or the Ottomans could survive if it were more mainstream. But why didn't it?
DBWI: Why Didnt "Nationalism" Take Off?
- Thread starter AltoRegnant
- Start date
-
- Tags
- austria dbahq dbwi nationalism ottomans
Well, it's an interesting concept but I just don't see what place it would have in the Europe of the time. It seems a philosophy intended more for the use of states to justify their claims than for everyday people to improve their lot-- and the states which existed then were simply not important enough to the public to bridge this difference of interests. The theory of statehood shared by the Dutch Republic and the customary-legalist ministers of Bourbon France was founded on respect for local institutions, be they parlements or Estates or extraterritorial enclaves, to ensure the public good after the devastating Wars of Religion. It seems inconceivable that the 1700s' ecumenical culture of mutual feedback, in which critics of the policies employed in one province or nation could safely publish from another, and in which the international usage of French made it abnormal for ambitious publishers to not have an international readership, could give way to a renewed warmongering. And setting aside the question of how nationalism could appeal to people, who would it appeal to? Leibniz, the genius of the time, published all his works in French. And even in faraway Russia, the Orthodox Church was adjusting its practices to match those of their Greek contemporaries in Constantinople.
Last edited:
Every leading ruling dynasty in Europe has always ruled over multiple linguistic groups, so nationalism, an idea of German intellectuals, really only became popular in minor countries where the ruling dynasty was too unimportant to rule over multiple "nations". I'm not sure how you change that, unless you get a king that is both powerful but rules over a country where there is just one "nation".
Maybe a german rivaling Austria? Though it would be difficult- the german states often carved out states for the other sons from their conquests, weakening them too much.
Dolan
Banned
Speaking of German Kingdom with a very complicated situation... Well, the Kingdom of Hanover is one.
They are often culturally included as one of the German State, but their ruling Monarchs is British, their formal Language is English, and while HR Emperor, Prussian Kings, Bavarian Kings, and even French ones tried to sway them away from their British liege, the Hanoverians stayed loyal to London all the way rather than joining the alliance of European Mainlanders.
There is no way the Hanoverian situation could occurred in a world dominated by such Nationalism. English-speaking Germans are practically the major debunking of The Theory of Nationalism.
All the important principalities in the Kingdom of Germany have important connections with non-German lands. The Hapsburgs obviously, but you have the Albertines with Poland, the Hohenzollerns with Prussia and parts of Poland, the Wittlesbaches with Holland, and the Welfs with England. The problem is that the nationalist ideology seems to have arisen in Germany partly as a protest against this situation.
Dolan
Banned
It's tragic but we do understand the current of dissatisfaction behind them.
Ethnic-wise, Germans are one of the largest group in Europe, but the Habsburg rulers of the Empire speak Spanish Or Italian as their first language, and many Major "German Kings" actually preferred to speak their own native, non-German tongue. Sure, the German language are the de-facto common language in Europe, but the popularity of Latin made the later the common formal language of the High Courts, and thus German Language were regarded as crude as the Language of Peasants and Merchants.
Well, English, French, Italian, Spanish, Polish, etc, do have their own peasants and merchants, but they were legal, formal languages of their own court, while German Language have bad connotation worldwide.
And thus, Nationalism is, in essence, a "German Pride" movement.
Where else could something like this take off? Italy's republics mean they avoid sharing rulers with other nations, surely they'd have been ripe for the philosophy to arise, right?
Dolan
Banned
Italian Republics are pretty blatantly controlled by The Papacy though, at least most of them. Haven't you notice that Italian rulers post-reformation have been almost consistently coming from the Clerical background?
Italian "Nationalism" is already present as the Theocratic movement that sought to brought all Christendom back under control of The Paapcy
Interesting point. In ther East, Joseon and Wakoku are one of the largest ethnic groups but both the Joseon and Wakoku rulers used Chinese in matters of politics. Both Joseon and Wakoku are extremely prideful of their people even though they are often lumped with China...interestingly enough when China itself has so many groups of people as well though.
Dolan
Banned
Is Venetians considered "Italians" nowadays?
I meant, while their capital could be considered lies on traditionally "Italian" soil, the bulk of their Empire is on Balkan Coast, Crete, Rhodes, and Cyprus...
Not Italian at all, more like Greek.
They do have land around the boot of italy and fair bits of central italy.
Thomas1195
Banned
Verona, Padua, Pola, Istria and Dalmatia are Italian/Venetian. However, the Venetian language is somewhat different from mainstream Italian.