Count Camillo Benso Di Cavour And Otto Von Bismarck Of France

1231 Words3 Pages

The divided European nations in the mid ninteenth century came under the control of Count Camillo Benso di Cavour of Italy and Otto von Bismarck of Germany, both leaders in unification and prominent figures in European politics. The Congress of Vienna after Napoleon reshaped boundaries based on previous monarchies and disregarded ethnic and cultural boundaries, leaving European states disconnected and detatched. At the time, Prussia and the German Confederation and the states on the Italian peninsula were each connected by shared languages, cultures, religions, and ideals. The Napoleonic wars sparked a common identity and surge of Nationalism for European states, which was channelled by Bismarck and Cavour to unify Italy and Germany. Additionally, …show more content…

However, they both disliked nationalists who asked for a republic or communist state because it threatened their power. European nations were phyiscally divided after the Napoleonic wars, but simultaneously brought together by the Nationalist spirits evoked in wartime. Liberal middle class citizens in Germany sought to transform absolutist Prussia, the most powerful kingdom in the German confederation, into a constitutional monarchy and unify the 38 states. Bismarck, as Prime Minister, also wanted to unify Germany but he did so in the interest of his own power and expansionist ideology. He sought to have German patriotism and glory in the unity of wartime, encouraging citizens to volunteer for their country which created the common identity and cause which is core to Nationalism. However, his dictorial actions overrode his hopeful liberal speeches to the Nationalists. He was known to override Parliament and rarely included elected officials in his decision making porcesses. Unlike Cavour, he was much more aggressive militarily and willing to achieve unification more militarily than Cavour. Cavour was a skilled statesman who was also a very intelligent diplomat, who was willing to encourage Nationalism to maintain control and amaldagate Italy. Cavour and Giusseppe Girabaldi organized the Red Shirts, an entirely volunteer based army that fought in Southern Italy and toppled the conservative princes. …show more content…

For example, Cavour was a former diplomat and based his political decisions strategically based on Italy’s relationship of other countries and maintaining the balance of power. Cavour was not as involved in the public sphere and gave far fewer speeches than Bismarck. Also, Cavour gave rights to unions, held elections that he approved, and implemented socialist welfare policies. Even though Cavour approved all political elections, he promoted universal male suffrage for the legislative body. He also implemented conservative actions including appointing ministers as puppet rulers, overthrowing the national Assembly and controlling the economy closely. Bismarck’s style of ruling domestically differed greatly from Cavour. To start, Bismarck was the sole unifier of Germany and his motivations of war left Germany a highly miliarized land that offset the balance of power in Europe and threatened other nations. Bismarck promised lower taxes, a legislative body, and universal male suffrage. It can also be argued that Bismarck was more of an expansionist than he was interested in unification. Bismarck’s motives to conquer territories were selfish and egotistic, with an end goal of increasing his own political power. Bismarck tried to inspire German pride and nationalism through his reforms, including “Kulterkampf.” Also, unlike Cavour, Bismarck expanded the reach of Parliament to unify Italy compared to

Open Document