More handpicked essays just for you.
Nationalism vs patriotism
Similarly between patriotism and nationalism
The importance of nationalism vs. patriotism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In reviewing John Lukacs, The Duel, I noticed that the author has other intentions in mind besides the facts. Lukacs gives a very precise account of the actualy events during those eighty days but in my opinion he wants the reader to grab the bigger concepts. One of these concepts is that Lukacs wants the reader to honestly consider just how close the Allies came to losing the war. Another of these notions is the idea that the main difference between Churchill and Hitler concerned nationalism versus patriotism and a third idea is just how greatly history can be effected by the courageous decisions of a few people.Lukacs makes strong mention of how close Hitler came to victory. Hitler got everything he wanted for so long, without even having to resort to force. Lukacs describes Hitler as ''being an amateur at generalship, but he posessed the great professional talent applicable to all human affairs: an understanding of human nature and the understanding of the weaknesses of his opponents. That was enough to carry him very far''(3). Lukacs wants to make that a point in all of his readers' minds; that Hitler could manipulate people so he could get what he wanted without resorting to violence. Of course, the threat of violence was always present but Hitler was smart enough that he could scare his enemies enough that they would not want to engage in combat. Once actually forced to fight, Hitler still dominated and he could have very possibly won the war if not for that one fatal mistake he made by hesitating in his plans against the English. I think it is important that Lukacs makes sure to get this message across because some people choose to ignore this truth due to the devastating outcomes that would have resulted if Hitler succeeded. The major point presented by Lukacs concerning the difference between Hitler and Churchill has to do with nationalim versus patriotism. Lukacs describes Hitler as a nationalist and Churchill as a patriot. He describes Hitler as a man of ideas and Churchill as a of man principles, because Churchill's ideas changed throughout the war while Hitler tended to think that his ideas were principles. In a footnote there lies a a brilliant explanation of this idea. Dr. Johnson states ''Nationalism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Patriotism is defensive, while nationalism is aggressive. Patriotism is not a substitute for a relig... ... middle of paper ... ...till evident in this directive when it says if necessary. Hitler delivered his speech for a last attempt at peace on July 19, but it did not work. One of his main goals for the speech was to disconnect the people of England from Churchill but this failed because of the manner in which he spoke about Churchill. The next day, Hitler said that the English response meant that the German attack would commenec on Britain in a few days. Looking back at how these events unfolded, everyone should be glad that Hitler made such a mistake. I, for one couldn't believe that Hitler made this mistake. Throughout reading this entire book Hitler usually makes swift, decisive actions that get results and that is why Lukacs stresses this string of events in the book.Overall, this book is wonderfully written on a very interesting topic. The reader is put in the middle of a war of nerves and will between two men, one of which we have grown up to learn to hate. This only makes us even more emotional about the topic at hand. For a history book, it was surprisingly understandable and hard to put down. It enlightened me to the complex problems that existed in the most memorable three months this century.
To illustrate, according to Churchill, it indicates the worst side of World War I as how it was the most damaging and cruel war of humanity because it was global and wounded most people. Moreover, it confused the thought of how the war started, who was responsible for the war, and how it ended up, and no one still got a right answer, but the previous war was not cruel that kill most of the people around the world. It was well known who started the war and whose fault it was. Also, Generals in WWI were not participating directly with their soldiers and were sitting far from the wars with having information through telephones. Therefore, they had less effects on their soldiers, and the armies did not get encouragement from their Generals as in the previous wars had, such as the physical battle of Hannibal and Caesar, Turenne and Marlborough, Frederick and Napoleon. Another point of view in the essay is that Generals as Napoleon have hard work to do in order to attack a place. For instance, they should organize their armies, have better tactics and plans, know how to defeat themselves, know the right time of attacking, and make big decisions. Hence, it is the deal of thousands of men’ life including the General himself in the previous wars, but the World War I was only the armies and citizens as well were the victims, so Generals were disappearing. That’s why
Also Brian Bond describes about the nazis and Adolf Hitler try to conquer and be the most powerful country in the world. In the end of the book Brian Bond describes the defeats over the nazis.On page 168 Brian Bond said ‘’Britain ended the war in an impressively strong position with the largest army, navy and air force in the world.’’ In that sentence it shows that they had confidence that they could defeat a big army and also a big leader. ‘’But we should take another look at the proposition that the persistence of war in history proves that war comes from human nature’’ (Three Violence and Human). This sentence says it all in human nature mostly because we don’t think as human beings we think as monsters and solve everything with destruction and killing each other and It seems like it’s becoming as an
When Hitler’s panzer divisions pushed towards Stalingrad, Stalin claimed that an invasion across the English Channel would force Hitler to distract troops from the Soviet front (Murray). Churchill and Roosevelt did not think the Allies had enough troops to engage in an attack on European soil. Instead, they launched Operati...
By the Beginning of 1940 World War 2 was already well on it way. Hitler's military technique, know as the “Blitzkrieg”, was very successful and within a few months almost all of mainland Europe was in German hands. England, with their Prim Minister Sir. Winston Churchill, was Hitler’s only undefeated opponent. Assuming the England would soon surrender, Germany turned on there strongest ally, Russia and was ready to take over the world. However, the tided started turning and with the bombing of Peril Harbour the USA joined the war against German and Japan. With so many world powers against him Hitler could not stand long and soon the German armies were defeated. Then, in a last blow to force the war to an end, the USA dropped the most deadly weapon the world has ever seen and in the matter of seconds killed thousands of Japanese. It only took two atomic bombs to end World War Two, but the technology of splitting atoms for deadly weapons would shape the next 45 years. Clearly, World War Two, springing from the radical ideas of Hitler, drastically altered the coarse of history and showed the potential deviation that one man and his sinful ideas can create.
To write this book the author, John Toland, had to devote 15 years researching different stories from all sides of the war. He studied war memoirs, interviewed war veterans, and read military documents. While doing this he focused on both the allied and axis forces to truly understand both sides of the story and be able to write such a descriptive and accurate piece of work. This research was used in the book to describe the unlikely victory of the Americans over the Germans during the “Battle of the Bulge”.
Hitler was very manipulative before he even took over as dictator, and even before he was announced the Chancellor of Germany. Hitler’s plan all along was to become the dictator of Germany, even before he was...
Many a successful wordsmith has mastered voice, Winston Churchill included. He start off his speech in a jovial way, after all, summertime has hit Britain. But Winston mainly concerns himself with the prospect of Germany hitting England, and so, as he delves deeper into his speech, his voice becomes less jovial and more ironic and grave. In his last three paragraphs, he speaks as though with a straight face, getting into the nutshell of the current events. “If Herr Hitler does not make war, there will be no war. No one else is going to make war. Britain and France are determined to shed no blood except in self-defense or in defense of their Allies…we must strive to frame some system of human relations in the future which will bring to an end this prolonged hideous uncertainty.” (Churchill, Paragraph 9; 11) So there: he has laid down the gauntlet for America. The US must come to the aid of their Allies, or only more uncertainty will abound. Using voice, a most powerful weapon, Winston Churchill successfully, eventually, helped cajole America into World War
The appeasement was an unnecessary course of action as due to the weakness it imposed on the Allies, as it gave Hitler the impression they were too morally weak to oppose him. This advocated the possibility of war as the appeasement allowed Hitler to challenge the Versailles settlement with bold initiatives: withdrawing from the League of Nations (1933), canceling war debt payments (1933), beginning a program of public rearmament (1935), and moving troops into the demilitarized German Rhineland (1936). By 1931 Britain’s vengeful mood of 1919 had shifted to one of guilt for the excesses done to punish Germany.That sentiment, coupled with a loathing and fear of a repeat of the “Butcher’s Bill” of World War I, drove British politicians to the mistaken belief that “righting” the wrongs of Versailles would ameliorate the situation and restore calm. However, when Hitler reoc-cupied the Rhineland in defiance of the treaties of Versailles and Locarno (1925). The Germans could not as yet have resisted any British and French military response, but Britain did nothing and France, which mobilized 150,000 troops behind the Maginot Line, would do nothing more without British support. Hitler later confessed that if the French army had advanced into the Rhineland in response to his actions, the Germans would have had to withdraw as they were incapable of mounting real
Haffner has confronted many issues that have, according to him, been overlooked by other historians, and it is for this reason that the book is suitable for any person interested in the phenomenon that is Hitler. Haffner had a greater reason than surprise theories and new evidence for writing the book though. This is apparent throughout the book and, most notably, at the end. He is appealing to the younger generations of readers, those that did not experience Hitler themselves. It is to this group that Haffner intends to send a message. This will be discussed later.
The Battle of France is over. I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin… The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be turned on us. Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad sunlit uplands. But if we fail, the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, ‘This was their finest hour.’(Hough, Richard. The Triumph of R.A.F. Fighter Pilots. New York: The McMillan Company, 1971. 9-10).
only thing to do in a time of war. It is seen that Hitler did not want
In order to stop the fighting between countries, Europe needed to put some actions into effect because appeasement was not working. Germany proved that by disregarding the Versailles Treaty. According to Hitler after disregarding the Versailles Treaty, “I look upon this day as marking the close of the struggle for German equality status…the path is now clear for Germany’s return to European collective cooperation” (Document 3, 1936) This quote explains a vast difference between Hitler’s and the other European countries' views. With Hitler’s affirmation to make Germany equal and even more powerful than the other European countries, the other European countries would have to set up collective security because they would have very little insight on what Hitler would be planning; leading to more destruction. Now, Europe would be more prepared if Hitler decided to attack. A quote from Winston Churchill explaining why collective security is the right answer is, “…I think all of the opportunities to stop the growth of Nazi power which have been thrown away. The responsibility must rest with those who have control of our political affairs. They neither prevented Germany from rearming, nor did they rearm us in time…Thus they left us in the hour of trial without a strong national defense or system of international security” (Churchill). That quote explains how collective security is the best answer to stop war and the destruction Hitler is
In the summer of 1942 Hitler was in a happier mood than at any time since the fall of France. “The Russian is finished,” Hitler told his Chief of Staff on July 20 (Clark 209). The Germans were coming off three victories at Kerch, Kharkov, and Sebastopol. In addition they continued to gain ground in the Caucasus
Adolf Hitler was the leader of the Nazi Party who made a commanding impact on World War II. Hitler became a man of great power over a short period of time. Although he was not elected to be chancellor of Germany until 1933, there were events that occurred before that led to his greatness. He was born in Austria however he was the absolute ruler of Germany. In view of that fact that Hitler became chancellor, Hitler believed that he could do anything, which caused the Enabling Act. “…The Enabling Act, which suspended the constitution for four years and allowed Nazi laws to take effect without parliamentary approval”(Hunt & Martin, 850). Hitler was able to bolt for freedom with anything he had a desire for. The way that he led his Nazi-Germans was contrasting because no other leader, dictator, or commander was ever able to do what Hitler was able to. “At the same time, the media allowed authoritarian rulers and would-be dictators such as Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin, and Adolf Hitler to shape uniform political thought and to control citizens’ behavior far beyond what previous rulers had been able to do” (Hunt & Martin, 829). Adolf Hitler has made a substantial effect on society during his time, and still has today.
Hitler’s first goal was to gain absolute power. Propaganda played a major role in Hitler’s successful rise to absolute power. (Cps News 1)