Political Turbulence in the 20th And 21st Century

The 20th century was a time in world history that dominated by significant change. We witnessed two of the most devasting wars with World War I and II, the creation of nuclear power, and the space race. The 20th century also brought about the Cold War, a rise in Nationalism, and a fall in imperialism. It is believed that the 20th century saw the greatest change around the world since the Roman Empire fell in 400 B.C. Although the 21st century has only just begun, it has been met with a stark contrast compared to the 20th century. There has been a shift away from state sovereignty and a rise in the global economy. We have seen Europe come together to form the European Union, agree to a common currency, and standardize laws that helped with the free movement of goods, services, people, and capital within an internal single market. The 21st century also marked a significant rise of globalization. We have greater access to culture, food security, capital, technology, goods, and services through the evolution of technology and the creation of the internet.

Admittedly, not all of the 21st century has been met with optimism and embracing of global ideas. There has also been a pushback against globalization in the form of right-wing populism across countries such as the United States and England. This populism often follows the themes of anti-immigration, state sovereignty, and welfare chauvinism. It can be thought that many of these political movements are a response to the previous turbulence. It should also be noted that it would be unwise to look at any one of these issues from one perspective, be it a liberalist, realist, or constructivist point of view. Rather, it is necessary to see that they all play a role in where we are today.

First, it is important to touch on the most important issues of the 20th century and how they contribute to the problems we face today. The 20th century was a time of great change and great turbulence. I will focus on a couple of specific moments for the sake of this paper as well as themes and the lingering repercussions from them. The first theme I will be looking at is Nationalism. The 20th century was wrought with Nationalism. Particularly if we look at World War I, there were very strong ties for everyone involved to Nationalism. It was a period of time where individual countries and their people began to take more pride in themselves and their country. Leading up to World War I, there was France wanting to regain their pride and take revenge after the Franco-Prussian War. They also wanted to take the Alsace Lorraine region back from Germany. Germany and Italy had crept away from kingdom states and unified under nation-state status only a couple decades before the start of the 20th century. The Balkans was another area in Europe that saw a rise in Nationalism, partly due to the rising Nationalism we see across Europe during this time and partly because of the Austria-Hungary Empire trying to push itself further into the Balkans. A young Serbian nationalist by the name of Gavrilo Princip ultimately killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914 as retaliation for the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Shortly after that incident, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia blaming them for the death of the Archduke and we saw all of Europe embroiled in the first World War through mutual alliances. The pride in one’s own country, greed and refusal to negotiate all contributed to World War I. Countries were more focused on consolidating and growing their own power rather than negotiating and working out their problems. There was false hope and aggression in the form of Nationalism to help countries win war instead of diplomacy. Unfortunately, this national pride and sense of independence did not end with the conclusion of World War I. It carried on into World War II. 

The aftermath of World War I brought about much change to a devastated Europe. Many of the countries involved were now heavily in debt and looking for revenge. Their goal was to make Germany as weak as possible through a policy of Revanchism. The stipulations of the Treaty of Versailles took away German Territory, either distributing it to other countries or helping create whole new countries in the process. The creation of these countries played into sparking World War II. While most other countries felt the Treaty of Versailles was justifiable, the German people viewed the treaty as unjust and a vicious act of revenge upon them for the Franco-Prussian War. The Treaty of Versailles also crippled the German economy to the point of depression throughout the 1930’s. It was through this devastation that allowed for the rise of Adolf Hitler and a new sense of national pride. Hitler was able to capitalize on German resentment of the treaty and was charismatic enough to espouse extreme nationalism. Eventually, by the late 1930’s Germany and Hitler began a period of annexing territories. Hitler reclaimed the German Rhineland in 1936, Austria in 1938, and eventually invaded Czechoslovakia in 1939 under the guise of reuniting the German people under one country. It wasn’t until Germany invaded Poland that the rest of Europe thought they went too far. As stated above, Hitler was very charismatic and was able to play on the poor treatment under the Treaty of Versailles, the sense of Nationalism, and regaining the pride Germany once had in the world and subtly turned that into an Ethnic Nationalism. As we all very well know, it was that form of Nationalism that lead to the Holocaust. The Allied Powers were too focused on Revanchism and let their own national pride get in the way instead of referring to Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points as a way of working with Germany and potentially preventing World War II from ever occurring. While the 20th century certainly had a lot of politically turbulent issues, it is hard to ignore two of the greatest wars and the circumstances that led to their start, especially when they helped shape the issues we face in the 21st century. 

The 21st century in a lot of ways is opposite to the 20th century. There is more cooperation among different states and there is more of an emphasis on globalization. Through globalization we saw, on average, an improved standard of living, shared creativity and innovation, lower costs of goods and services through breaking down trade barriers and an improved access to foreign culture. The 21st century also saw the rise of the European Union, Europe’s attempts to diplomatically address their problems rather than risk letting issues like nationalism threaten their future safety. The European Union has not only been actively working on peace within its own territory, but as recently as 2016 helped broker negotiations with Iran and their nuclear program. This is something that all of the United States’ power could not accomplish. The European Union works to foster solutions through the democratic process rather than military might. Despite a lot of advancements we have seen in the 21st century regarding technology, trade, and entities like the European Union, we are not without our own turbulence. 

In recent years there has been a pushback against globalization, it comes in the form of right-wing populism. Countries all over the world have begun to push back against globalization because they feel their own state’s sovereignty is being threatened. This anti-globalization sentiment is rooted in the belief that international agreements with other states undermines the ability of local entities to make decisions. Populists claim to be speaking for the people and in more developed countries they feel like they are losing a sense of self with technological change and an integrated global economy. It is easy to see the appeal of their argument, especially when combined with the increasing terrorist attacks that have occurred across Europe being tied to groups like Isis. That fear and apprehension is easy to manipulate. Take England for example, their attempts to leave the European Union (Brexit) has been predicated on a couple of primary components. The first being that if they are able to leave the European Union, then they will have the ability to control their own sovereignty and make their own trade deals.The second is that they need to leave the European Union so they can control their own immigration policies. Even in the United States, there has been a push for conservative populism because of the appeal it creates from having leaders who speak their minds. The reality is they have made false promises based on visceral reactions to multiculturalism and modernity and it has failed to produce real solutions while simultaneously not knowing what solutions to ask for. Looking at our own election, Trump spoke his mind appealing to everyday voters, making promises about universal health care, fixing corporate loopholes, and drug prices. The reality is that none of these changes have come to pass. Instead, we have a leader who plays on fears of immigration and no real solutions in the immediate future. While the 21st century is only about a fifth of the way done, we have seen an increase in terrorism both domestic and international, a push in different countries to return to state sovereignty, and mutually assured destruction is always a possibility. The world has seen unprecedented trade growth to the tune of 25 percent total global output despite these issues. During World War II for comparison sake it was only 5 percent. The reality is that even with this current pushback against globalization, there are still too many benefits for people, trade, and economies. Once the Brexit deal is finalized towards the end of this year, the question for England becomes, what next? They are currently on pace to leave the European Union with no trade deals. England only makes enough food to feed 52 percent of its population. Most of their food imports comes from Ireland, who will remain an EU member. It will become much harder to feed their citizens without any trades despite their proximity to Ireland. They are putting themselves in a situation where they are willing to sacrifice every aspect of their life in an attempt to regain their former place as a leading world power. They will no longer have trade consideration with the rest of Europe. Students will no longer have the equivalent to in-state tuition. Retirements, pensions, and healthcare will all change, especially for expats. All of this doesn’t even touch on the possibility of a hard border in Northern Ireland and the violence it could incite.

Political Turbulence between the 20th and 21st centuries as noted in this paper are, in a lot of ways similar. The 20th century was characterized by a push for groups of people to be allowed to govern themselves. The 21st century so far has been characterized by a push back against globalization and a return of state sovereignty. The rationale behind this rise if populism can be described as how economic openness in the West did not benefit everyone. There is a growing divide between those who identify as global citizens and those who feel marginalized and identify locally. Despite the global benefits of globalization, it is important to recognize that not everyone has benefitted from it. It is hard to know how strong of a challenge populism will be in the coming years because populism typically loses steam the longer it goes on. Populism tends to lose potency long term as it is harder to maintain anger and fear against specific groups. While it is important to listen to the problems that populists bring up, looking at it from a liberalist perspective, it is equally important to work together to find proper solutions that benefit as many people as possible. Globalization as a whole isn’t necessarily the point of contention. The movement of goods and services as well as money for that matter are accepted pretty much everywhere. Perhaps the primary point of contention with Globalization lies within the migration of people. That is a problem that must be approached from a global perspective and come up with rational solutions. Perhaps if countries could manage the migration of people more effectively it could persuade states to lend greater support to future globalization. The last thing any of us want is to return to the turbulence faced in the 20th century with another World War or perhaps an even turbulent future.

Work Cited

1. Cai, John, and Benjamin Weaver. “Adolf Hitler's Account of the 'Nation' and 'Nationalism'.” E-International Relations, May 5, 2011. https://www.e-ir.info/2011/05/16/adolf-hitlers-account-of-the-‘nation’-and-‘nationalism’/.
2. Chait, Jonathan. “Brexit and Trumpism Have Failed Because Conservative Populism Is a Lie.” Intelligencer. Intelligencer, March 13, 2019. http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/brexit-trump-conservative-populism.html.
3. Helm, Toby, Lisa Bachelor, and Daniel Boffey. “What Would Brexit Mean for Everyday Life in the UK?” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, February 28, 2016. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/feb/28/brexit-effect-everyday-life.
4. 'Letters: The EU, Not Nato, Has Prevented War in Europe.” The Independent. Independent Digital News and Media, June 13, 2016. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/david-cameron-eu-nato-war-in-europe-letters-a7022806.html.
5. “Long-Term Causes of World War I.” History Crunch - History Articles, Summaries, Biographies, Resources and More. Accessed September 11, 2019. https://www.historycrunch.com/long-term-causes-of-world-war-i.html#/.
6. Mauldin, John. “3 Reasons Brits Voted For Brexit.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, April 20, 2018. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmauldin/2016/07/05/3-reasons-brits-voted-for-brexit/#7bd700031f9d.
7. McDermott, Annette. “Did Franz Ferdinand's Assassination Cause World War I?” History.com. A&E Television Networks, April 16, 2018. https://www.history.com/news/did-franz-ferdinands-assassination-cause-world-war-i.
8. “Nazi Party.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, November 9, 2009. https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/nazi-party#section_2.
9. Ortiz-Ospina, Esteban, Diana Beltekian, and Max Roser. “Trade and Globalization.” Our World in Data, October 29, 2018. https://ourworldindata.org/trade-and-globalization.
10. Roth, Kenneth. “World Report: The Dangerous Rise of Populism: Global Attacks on Human Rights Values.” Human Rights Watch, January 19, 2017. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/dangerous-rise-of-populism.
11. Slotnik, Daniel E. “Franz Ferdinand, Whose Assassination Sparked a World War.” The New York Times. The New York Times, June 28, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/obituaries/archives/archduke-franz-ferdinand-world-war.
12. “Treaty of Versailles.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, October 29, 2009. https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-i/treaty-of-versailles-1.
13. “UK Threat.” Global Food Security. Accessed September 22, 2019. https://www.foodsecurity.ac.uk/challenge/uk-threat/.