Monthly Archives: February 2015

Fichte’s new Germany

Posted on by

Johann Gottlieb Fichte, was a Germany Philosopher, and reformer, who was also a great supporter of the French Revolution. Fichte would have been considered a liberal at the time who wanted to see the lower classes rise up, and take a portion of prosperity for themselves. His ideals came from the area of Europe in which he lived. Fichte was a resident of Berlin, which was not part of one specific nation. Berlin was much like an Italian City-State during the Renaissance because it was not always under control of one nation or kingdom.

The Germany that we know today did not exist in anyway what so ever. The region that is called Germany today was a collection of over thirty different states that were never autonomous with each other. Napoleon was the first man to unite the German states into a specific body, the Confederation of the Rhine. This action started to bring German speakers together.

This increase in the idea that people who had the same language, customs, and cultural identity could be a nation was new, but one that soon became very popular with German citizens of the many different states. Fichte’s proto-nationalism was widely read, and his writings, and the writings of many other early 19th century thinkers became the “bibles” of the great nation builders such as Otto Von Bismark in Germany, and Garibaldi in Italy.

“We Grow Out of Iron” and the Socialist Message

Posted on by

In the poem “We Grow Out of Iron,” Aleksei Gastev preached for socialist revolution rooted and cultivated in Russian factories. Gastev targeted the audience of factory workers in 1918 by relating the strength of the revolutionary cause to steel beams that support the factory. The steel represents in many ways the relationship between the workers and the revolution. The magnitude and strength of the steel factory structure Gastev described in the poem translated to his vision of some sort of labor revolution. His poem also represented an effort to give context of the socialist movement by tailoring his message to specific social class of people by relating the revolutionary message to their lifestyle.

But, Gastev’s message seems hazy because of some of his word choices. Throughout the poem, he narrates with the first person singular “I” rather than “we.” This implies to the reader an individual or singular effort. Even though factory workers at the time could probably resonate with the poem’s message regardless the phrasing, it is still noticeable. But, the first person “I” could of contradicted the principle of socialism to some, which is an emphasis on the mission and identity of a collective group of people rather than the individual. Gastev concluded his poem with the line “victory shall be ours!”[1] The switch from “I” to “we” represents a connection between the individual and the whole. Why was the poem phrased in the “I” person if it was intending to promote socialism? Were the efforts to make socialism accessible and achievable for Russian revolutionaries tarnishing the goal of Marx’s vision of socialism?

[1] Aleksei Gastev, “We Grow Out of Iron,” (1918).

German Nationalism

Posted on by

Philosophers and authors Johann Gottlieb Fichte and Johann Gottfried von Herder both had very similar ideas on what it meant to be a nation and what it meant for a group of humans living in a defined area to become a nation. In order to become a nation they all had to identify themselves similarly. Both of these authors came out of a turbulent time for Germany, Fitche was writing in 1806 and von Herder was in 1784. This time period in Europe can be recognized by the nations that began to form, no longer was Europe divided into many different municipalities scattered about.
The French Revolution began just five years after von Herder wrote his Materials for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind. As von Herder watched the years of turmoil leading up to the French Revolution, as he watched the people of France become a single body working towards a single goal he theorized the importance of nations but more importantly nationalism. He saw that a group of people who have been defined by nature, whether it be language, terrestrial setting, or race, could gain a sense of purpose when they become proud of their sense of belonging to a nation. To relate this idea to popular culture all that one has to do is look at the Super Bowl and its super fans. These people get a sense of belonging when they watch their teams accomplish great acts and support them in any way they can find, whether it be building a giant Seahawks logo on their front lawn or getting the “Patriots, Super Bowl XLIX Champions” tattooed on their chest a week before the game is even played. Meanwhile a team also benefits from such fanaticism because it bolsters their morale and provides support for their purpose. This is the exact same way that nationalism works for a nation, the people are proud to be part of their nation so they support their nation, in return, with this support, the nation can accomplish great things, which creates more pride.
Fichte followed up von Herder’s ideas 22 years later, after the French Revolution had ended but just at the beginning of Napoleon’s conquests into Germany. Fichte was now looking at a united country of France, one that had found its nationalism and was proud to be. Napoleon had occupied many of the small insignificant Germanic townships and cities with ease and forced Fichte to see the importance of a nation, both from the self defense perspective and for the over all efficiency of a territory. He argues that “Thus was the German nation placed-sufficiently united within itself by a common language and a common way of thinking, and sharply enough severed from the other peoples-in the middle of Europe, as a wall to divide races not akin ….” (Fichte), meaning that there was a clear “German Nation”. An area defined by nature, language and common culture that significantly enough that it should become a single nation, a single nation which the people recognize and take pride in. Fichte proclaims that “German states, whose separate existence was in itself contrary to all nature and reason” (Fichte), he is clearly stating an obvious importance in the states of Germany to cease to be divided. If the nation-states were to cease to be divided then, as a nation, the Germans could become more than what they were. Both of these men helped to define the meaning of nationalism and they truly helped to show its power in the formation and longevity of nations.

The French Political and Cultural Revolutions

Posted on by
****Response to Friday’s prompt that I was having issues posting
The transition from absolutism to enlightenment brought a new set of societal ideals that impacted both the political and social structure of France. By turning the hierarchical political system on its head, a significant cultural revolution was bound to accompany it.
Kant, in his analysis of enlightenment described it as man’s ability “to make use of understanding without direction from another” (Kant 1). This new emphasis on reason and self-reliance very directly confronts the old absolutist hierarchy, where everyone is reliant upon those higher in the social/political estate system. Similarly, Turgot also reflected on these changing principles by underlining the self-sufficient providers and farmers of the third estate as the most important part of society. This in hand with economic hardship and ideological influences from the American Revolution encouraged the third estate to fracture from the old absolutist system in favor of one where each individual voice had the opportunity to express his opinions.
France’s cultural revolution tailed on the heels of the countries crumbling political structure. As the estate system turned upside down, individuals began searching for their voice in the new system. During the absolutist regime the church was a huge part of the broken political system, so symbols of this past regime were abolished as quickly as possible. A new calendar was erected, churches were renamed, and names of former Kings and Queens were banned. This vast cultural upheaval was a direct reflection of the political upheaval that had just taken place. People simply wanted out with the old and in with the new. In this case, the old was marked by the church and monarchs and the new was marked by reason.
Another huge cultural phenomenon that was intertwined with the political revolution was a newly born French nationalism. In La Marseilles, a new French identity is expressed in lyrics such as “sacred love of the fatherland, guide and support our vengeful arms” (Modern History Source Book 1). People who had fought together suddenly identified with their fellow countrymen, and culture began taking on a French identity instead of a regional one. This would again connect with the political phenomenon of the former third estate having a say in political affairs; people had a reason to unite culturally after having united politically. Having a new voice in the system, those in the far corners of France suddenly felt more connected to the capitol.

German Nationalism

Posted on by

German philosopher Johann Gottfried von Herder lived during the 18th century, contributing much to the philosophy of history. Inspired by the Enlightenment, he thought rationally about the correlation between human events and history. In one of his more known works, Materials for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind, he laid the foundation for German nationalism. As western Europe began its nationalist movement, people living in central Europe (today Germany) had a difficult time grasping with the idea of a collective group under one nation. Since hundreds of people speaking different languages and having different customs lived in the region, von Herder argued that Nature brings groups of people together which eventually establishes a sense of national identity. His worked is targeted at future activists who believed in a need for establishing a nation. He believes, “active human powers are the springs of human history, and, as man originates from and in one race, so his body, education, and mode of thinking are genetic” (Halsall). Because of this, a group of individuals will establish a national identity.

Similar to von Herder, Johann Gottlieb Fichte hailed from Germany and is considered by some to be one of the Fathers of German Nationalism. Inspired by Immanuel Kant, Fichte dedicated his work to understand the mystery of human consciousness and a need to establish German nationalism. In his, Addresses to the German Nation, he states, “Those who speak the same language are joined to each other by a multitude of invisible bonds by nature herself, long before any human art begins; they understand each other and have the power of continuing to make themselves understood more and more clearly; they belong together and are by nature one and an inseparable whole” (Fichte). Since this bond exists between man, a national identity needed to be establish to incorporate all who lived in a region who shared similar ideals.

 

Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Thirteenth Address, Addresses to the Gerrnan Nation, ed. George A. Kelly (New York: Harper Torch Books, 1968), pp. 190­91,193­94,197­98.

 

German Nationalism

Posted on by

Nationalism is defined as ” devotion and loyalty to one’s own country” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nationalism) and it was the main focus in Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s piece To the German Nation. Fichte was a German philosopher who lived from 1762 to 1814 and developed many of his ideals from analyzing Kant and his writings. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Gottlieb_Fichte). He aimed for the ears of the common German man/woman to rally together and show unity and pride in their respective nation. Once a supporter of France and the Revolution, Fichte changed his stance after Napoleon overrode Germany. Fichte wrote, “Those who speak the same language are joined to each other and have the power of continuing to make themselves understood more and more clearly.” (Fichte) He spoke against “the deceptive vision of a universal monarchy” and attempted to convince the German population to dig deeper and embody the ideals of their nation as a whole. Nationalism is an extremely important factor in the rise of any nation and began to escalate in this time period for the Germans.

Germany Becoming Germany

Posted on by

Back in 1806, Johann Gottlieb Fichte made his thirteenth address to the German Nation. Fichte was a German philosopher who was also a supporter of the French Revolution and the ideas behind it((Fichte, Johann Gottlieb. To the German Nation. Fordham University, 1997)). When the new country of France invaded the German states, Fichte was not as supportive anymore. He saw how the Frenchmen were different from the German people and thought the Germans could unite together like the French had.

In his thirteenth address here, Fichte was trying to rally the people of Germany together. Though his language gets a little complicated towards the end, Fichte was writing to the everyday people of Germany. This was his thirteenth address so the common people would have understood him by then. The common people were the ones that led the revolution in France, so the German common people could do the same.

Fichte was trying to get people to understand that the battles that the French had held with and for them was on German soil and German blood had been split. He indented to make a nation out of the German people who could understand each other, unlike the foreign Frenchmen.

Nationalism within “Materials for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind”

Posted on by

In German philosopher Johann Gottfried von Herder’s piece, “Materials for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind” he provided other German thinkers with the knowledge and ability to be able to think and identify with nationalism for themselves. For most European countries, it was easier to understand nationalism with the similarities between people within their state, but for Germany, it was comprised of, “Peoples of different religions, languages, and traditions lived interspersed with each other under a huge variety of states and semi-states – empires, kingdoms, dukedoms, and independent cities.” (Halsall 1).
In the writing, it is discussed what the ideas for nationalism are. Nationalism can be understood as a similarity or “national character” between people within a given defined boundary. People can identify more closely with someone that looks, speaks, and acts with the same tendencies as them, rather than someone that comes in from another country and speaks an entirely different language.

Thoughts on Materials for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind

Posted on by

“Materials for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind” was written by Johann Gottfried von Herder in 1784. In the article he emphasizes the concept of nationalism and tries to explain what it means to be a nationalist.

He explains that it is human nature not to be aware of where you are from but he emphasizes nationalism can be based on people who have a “common history, language, and tradition” (Halsall, 1). He explicitly explains that it is human nature to be aware of being in a town or family rather than a sovereign state.

Although the article was written for a German-based audience, the document was an important piece for the French revolution. “Materials for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind” helped unify the French by essentially saying that those who speak the same language, (French in this situation) should be proud to part of a great state.