|
GnuBobo
Frilly Cuffs Extraordinaire


Registered: 06/17/04
Posts: 43,754
Loc: Charisma
|
History Majors Help/Nation-State relations explanation
#5367816 - 03/05/06 03:42 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Hey, I'm hoping someone studying/that has studied history or polisci can explain something to me. I'm reading this NYtimes article about housing prices in Amsterdam over the years (I just love the architecture of the tall skinny houses with the flourishes at the top) and then, there is this statement:
"Then, once again, the bottom falls out. In 1672, France and England declared war on the Dutch Republic. The English strangled Dutch shipping; Louis XIV invaded by land. From 1670 to 1677, houses on the Herengracht lost 56 percent of their value."
Can someone please explain to me why invasions seemed to happen, not arbitrarily, but, almost whimsically, before, say, 1900, in various parts of the world? Is it because the nation-state wasn't hardened-out as a sovereign territory? But, more to my question, what was the understanding of the people and politicians about making war on another nation?
Today, we have nukes, modern war machines, strict territorial lines, and super-national bodies that can call for economic sanctions. I'm wondering what the general understanding of a sudden war action between peoples of territorial/cultural lands was. If Russia suddenly invaded Poland, there would be global condemnation. But, a couple of hundred years ago, you had empires, territories, etc.--it wasn't so clear-cut.
Hope that makes sense. Any help? Thanks.
-------------------- Jerry Garcia. JERRY GARCIA! JERRY GARCIA!!!!
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs



Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 11 days
|
Re: History Majors Help/Nation-State relations explanation [Re: GnuBobo]
#5368155 - 03/05/06 06:10 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I would say it had a lot to do with the Treay of Westphalia. Though there were a shit-ton of wars after its creation in the mid-1600's, there were many more before it.
It's just a partial answer, but I think it was a big push towards sovereighty of a state and the creation of "real" diplomacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Westphalia
|
RandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
|
Re: History Majors Help/Nation-State relations explanation [Re: Redstorm]
#5368171 - 03/05/06 06:15 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Redstorm to the rescue.
Occam's Razor away!
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs



Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 11 days
|
Re: History Majors Help/Nation-State relations explanation [Re: RandalFlagg]
#5368175 - 03/05/06 06:16 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
|
GnuBobo
Frilly Cuffs Extraordinaire


Registered: 06/17/04
Posts: 43,754
Loc: Charisma
|
Re: History Majors Help/Nation-State relations explanation [Re: Redstorm]
#5368337 - 03/05/06 07:11 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
That DOES NOT answer my human experience question! Feed me more, beatch.
-------------------- Jerry Garcia. JERRY GARCIA! JERRY GARCIA!!!!
|
daimyo
Monticello

Registered: 05/13/04
Posts: 7,751
Last seen: 12 years, 21 hours
|
Re: History Majors Help/Nation-State relations explanation [Re: GnuBobo]
#5369431 - 03/06/06 12:48 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
GnuBobo said: "Then, once again, the bottom falls out. In 1672, France and England declared war on the Dutch Republic. The English strangled Dutch shipping; Louis XIV invaded by land. From 1670 to 1677, houses on the Herengracht lost 56 percent of their value."
This specific instance was fueled by past war. They were fought over trade. The end of the Thirty Years War left things in shambles(Spanish empire destroyed), and the Dutch started to get clout. The English got mad when the Dutch cut into their North American routes and shit escalated from there. There were three wars over the course of 20 years.
Quote:
GnuBobo said: Can someone please explain to me why invasions seemed to happen, not arbitrarily, but, almost whimsically, before, say, 1900, in various parts of the world?
Mostly over money, spices, and territories. There really wasn't a reason not to go to war. If you felt you could take someone, why not?
Quote:
GnuBobo said: But, more to my question, what was the understanding of the people and politicians about making war on another nation?
Obviously this varied from place to place and person to person. By and large it was accepted as a common occurrence. There was a lot of allegiance to state, and so citizens were supportive of campaigns that would better their land. Leaders were not afraid to declare war to get what they wanted/needed. There were no watchdog groups to hound them, or public opinion polls, or 24 hour international news stations. You did what you had/wanted to.
On a personal level it comes down to things like aspiration, religion, philosophical views(who's works were studied? who advised as counsel?), and greed.
If you have questions about specific instances, I can probably help. I study a lot of old war and politics.
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
Edited by daimyo (03/06/06 01:06 AM)
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,460
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 2 hours, 28 minutes
|
Re: History Majors Help/Nation-State relations explanation [Re: daimyo]
#5370041 - 03/06/06 07:51 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
If your question is why so many invasions took place throughout the world, without regard for a nation - state sovereignty, I offer the below:
Imperialism (although that term was not coined until the 19th century) was a foundation for most governments in early human history. Here is my favorite historical explanation on the subject matter:
Imperialism is a policy of extending control or authority over foreign entities as a means of acquisition and/or maintenance of empires, either through direct territorial conquest or through indirect methods of exerting control on the politics and/or economy of other countries. The term is often used to describe the policy of a country in maintaining colonies and dominance over distant lands, regardless of whether the country calls itself an empire.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
|