Kraut. Did you know that first and second world wars where not started by Germans, but Russians. I base this argument on two facts. First world war; russians where the ones who funded and organized Serbian terrorists shell in Austria-Hungary. Second world war; Germany would have never attacked Poland whiout Russian support. And they did attack poland together whit Germans.
@@matiasovaska3652 the First World War, maybe, but to blame the second on Russia is silly. The Molotov Ribbentrop pact came AFTER the west signed treaties with germany
Wait are you telling me that someone thinks German militarism was fine and dandy? Well... Anyone who doesn't already have a large collection of German war memorabilia, if you catch my drift?
@@matiasovaska3652 Russia may have enabled Germany but that is absolutely not the same thing as causing. I'm guessing you arent familiar with the treaty of Rapallo, are you?
@@spectacles-dm Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, and Slavs as a "race" ever since King Boleslaw gave Polish land to Prussia to protect Catholics against Pagans and persecution... boy was he wrong.
The desire for a strong military is what happens when you get treated like a battlefield for centuries. Turns out nobody likes getting invaded on like 4 different fronts.
@@achyuthansanal All of Europe has been a battlefield for centuries. But Germany did suffer disproportionally in "relatively" modern times leading to the attitude of militarism that has plagued the country in the 19th and 20th centuries.
@@achyuthansanal actually Germany was special in that regard Spain has naturally defensible borders thanks to mountains France only has a small part of its borders that arent naturally defensible (the border with Belgium) and was for centuries Europe's dominant power. Britain is an Island etc etc etc. Its not coincidence that germany was militaristic to the extent that it was and that it was often the aggressor looking to create natural borders prevent french dominance and gain access to resources/curb Russian expansion in the east.
@@achyuthansanal well tbh it comes from the 100 years war and medievil europe and yes the geographical area of germany has had the most conflict in europe
Out of necessity, Prussia needed a well organized bureaucracy, something Germany inherited. You know, this is a deeper dive when it comes to Germany's military history.
Societies don't need bureaucracy at all--not one that has arbitrary power over your life. America operated and advanced for 130+ years with a very small Constitutionally limited government.
@@MaxAbramson3 And look where they ended up: segregated society with a second-class citizenry, robber-barons, destruction of beautiful natural scenery and eventually the most devastating economic downturn in the nation’s history
@@MaxAbramson3 America has always had bureaucracies it was just instead of a large centralized one it was hundreds of smaller bureaucracies that operated sometimes our National level sometimes on the state and sometimes on the county level. It was only when America had to deal with a Civil War and raise massive armies and then afterwords had to deal with massive monopolies that could overpower every single smaller bureaucracy it had to make and empowered big bureaucracies.
@@MaxAbramson3 Yes and that worked in America because America was isolated from countries that actually posed a threat to it didn’t have to be ruthlessly efficient with its resources or run humongous armies. It was only when slave plan Tatian owners became aristocrats and tried to break away and then the US had to deal with the first companies worth hundreds of millions that could just bribe their way through local and state bureaucracies. The USA was forced to buy the voters to build bigger more meritocratic bureaucracy as that was seen as the only way to keep rule of law and individual rights by a large amount of voters. And then WW2 happened which required A humongous military and civilian bureaucracy to wage efficiently which America build.
@@kommandantgalileo Yes I did, the only time the term psycho is used is in reference to Frederick William I (1:50), and Bismarck is never mentioned by name (although some images used are likely of him, but I can't confirm) EDIT: Forgive me, I forgot the first part of the video and was mainly focussing on the main part of the video where they were actually making points
@@kommandantgalileo As you can see from my edit, I do agree the intro of the video is flawed, I do find that the rest of the video is a fairly neutral telling of the power of bureaucracy in Prussia and Germany and how those institutions were instrumental what made Germany what it is, both good and bad
A fascinating look at how good bureaucracy is a through line of much of pre and post German unification history. The ending discussion about the kind of chicken and egg problem with bureaucracy is also interesting. Does good bureaucracy lead to good democracy, or vice versa?
As a German this Video title feels like an insult. "... loved war SO much" really? If it the titles was something like "What enabled Germany... " or anything like that, it would be fine. But the actual one implies that Germans were craving war for 300-400 years straight and that is just wrong. Germany is located right in the middle of Europe and always had powerful neighbours back until the Roman empire expanded to the Rhine. And with us Humans beeing what we are its, sadly, logical that there was one war after another for two millenia. Because overly ambitious people inside and outside of germany were always all so willing to sacrifice countless lifes for their personal goals. THEY might have loved war. But surely not the widow, the orphan or the Soldier dying in the mud. If i was to make a Video about the US fighting in Korea and Vietnam and thus would Name it "Why does America like killing Asian people so much?" it would be equaly insulting and misleading. So please get that straight. Well made content does not need clickbait.
I think you're right. What he also gets wrong is saying germany started two world wars. The first world war was started by austro-hungary, which forced germany to fight because of the treaty. Not because of bloodlust
@@unavlble Yes. Germany had its share in the start of WWI. But saying they started it, like it was some Solo yolo endevour is a gross oversimplification. As far as i know Germany mobilised its troops last.
Phenomenal response! I had the same thoughts when watching the video, it seemed almost anti-german in a sense. Especially when bringing up Prussian contempt for France without stating France's blatant expansionism in the 17th, 18, and most importantly 19th century. France didn't get Strasbourg because they asked nicely...
You clearly haven't been on TH-cam long enough. Sadly the algorithms really favor bold and controversial titles, and chances are sadly high that if they took your advice, you would never have clicked on the video in the first place 🥲
6:12 I highly recommend reading about Kurt Von Schleicher. He was German chancellor during Weimar Germany who personified the old conservatives who mainly dominated the republic. He is a key factor of how early the Nazi party gained strength and power up until ultimate dominance in 1933. Interesting video btw. A more critical view on Prussian and eventual German militarism. Though some parts I felt lacked context. Could just be me nitpicking though
Honestly, that description would fit far more aptly for Franz von Papen, Schleicher’s predecessor. As a landowning and politically unfamiliar man, he was subject to ridicule as that personification of “Old Germany” even during his tenure as chancellor. Schleicher was more complex. Besides arguing for decidedly left-leaning economic policies (even being branded “the Red General”), he was also rather pragmatic and opposed to the rising threat of Nazism that would later cause not only his downfall but also cost his life.
@@hanspetrich6520 Agreed. Although the Nazis didn't really respect him either, only seeing him as a useful tool to achieve more power. And when they didn't need him anymore, they just sent him off to be an ambassador to places like Austria and Turkey. Oh and Papen was also the intended target of a planned false flag attack by the Nazis to justify sending their troops into Austria.
@@spectacles-dm Honestly this video of yours is a shitshow of misrepresentation based on nothing but anti-german sentiment. Prussia was less militaristic than other European powers during it's time of existence, while Prussia was defending itself from it's neighbors and organizing itself other European countries conquered almost the entire world. And the Weimar Republic didn't fell because of conservatives in the German bureaucracy, but because it had never the support of the German population in the first place. The German Emperor abdicated because of the outbreak of soldier mutinies and revolts among the German population, yet the German Social Democrats got into office without any rights and declared the Weimar Republic on their own. Their first order of buisness was to ally themselves with the military junta, which had replaced the German Emperor over the course of WW1 as the defacto rulers of Germany. They then organized the Freicorps, who gunned down the mutinies and revolts that caused the abdication of the German Emperor in the first place. This act of betrayel and machiavellian grab for power lead to a hatred and distrust of the new Weimar ruling class from which the Weimar republic could never recover from.
Your video appeared in my recommendations list four months after its publication date, and honestly, it spoiled my day. I don't really want to know if the rest is like this one, and moreover, your audience already seems to be big enough at least.
Please don't show Bismarck besides Hilter and call him a psycho, that's really not fair to him. He would have found Hitler appalling just like the rest of the Prussian elite later in time.
Thank you normal human being! I‘ve recently read a book about him, and the more I learned from his decisions and thoughts, the more I realized that he has been much calmer and thoughtful than I initially suggested
@@chipsnfish7716 bro I can strongly recommend you to read Sebastian Haffner - he has several really good books, also one called "From Bismarck to Hitler". His books are so good you should really give it a shot :)
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
The love of bureaucracy runs deep in Germany. Reminds me of the effectiveness of the WW2 Passierschein surrender leaflet. The German efficiency thing is a myth though. Organized, yes. Efficient, no way. If anything the bureaucracy there greatly hinders any kind of efficiency (which you kind of hinted at when you mentioned the resistance to modernization)
this reminds me of Japanese bureaucracy which often in power rivals even the most well known politicians. In a 1975 article, political scientist Chalmers Johnson quotes a retired vice minister of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry who said that the Japanese Diet was merely "an extension of the bureaucracy". The official claimed that "the bureaucracy drafts all the laws.... All the legislature does is to use its powers of investigation, which for about half the year keeps most of the senior officials cooped up in the Diet."
This is the most appalling example of biased history I have come across, Germany was surrounded by other countries on its land borders and felt constantly threatened, eg. France, Poland, Russia and their cousins the Austrians. I would point out that England, France, Russia etc participated in more wars than Germany, which was not united until 1870 (After France declared war on the Germans) and even then Bavaria was semi independent. There is a whole lot of reasons for the rise of Hitler including that the Weimar Republic was unable to control the extremes of both the right and left (which left the mass of the citizenry in fear) and even then he was a minority government but once he got the levers of government then all dissent was crushed within Germany. See how Russia ended up after the Bolshevik coup of 1917.
The truth hurts, right. Hitler came to power cause Germans gave him power by voting and supporting him. Also spare me the part that Germans didn't know cause they did. The wanted world domination just like their leader and blamed the Jews for their problems.
The thing is… what is your point? None of this video contradicts that. What parts was he biased about? I agree he definitely shows bias in his videos but this isn’t an example of that.
The whole video sounded like a big nothing burger to me. A lot of fancy words, yes, but it genuinely felt like the whole argument was: why was bureaucracy bad? Because it existed in Germany.
@@ComanderSazabi2000 Are you kidding me? The point is that the power of the Bureaucracy (especially the military) over government allowed it to push the country to constant war
The title is both incorrect and misleading regarding the content of the video. What you are doing in this video is basically throwing around some buzzwords or cliche phrases (e.g. German bureaucracy, Militarism, etc.). At no point you explain what is unique or special about bureaucracy in Germany as opposed to any other nation, why or how does it lead to wars. And most importantly, as other commenters have also pointed out, it is just factually incorrect to claim that Germany has any kind of love or special interest for wars.
@@mint8648 Even if that's true (which I doubt, after all many Prussian reforms carried out by Friedrich Wilhelm the Great Elector were modelled on Dutch cities), how does it explain Germans' love for war?
@@archilkitiashvili1227 Because the German bureaucracy was staffed with various military leaders, and bureaucrats often held greater political authority than the monarchy and parliament
Special thanks to our good friend Kraut for lending his incredible voice to Mr. Bonaparte. French people please reply angrily about Napoleon’s voice, and Hohenzollern stans please share your favorite 🤡 WACKY 😂 Frederick William I moments! - SOURCES AND CORRECTIONS - www.spectacles.news/mini-doc-the-weird-reason-germany-loved-war-so-much/ 05:49 - a number of comments have pointed out Germany didn't start WWI. That's true. While they participated in the arms race, it's not quite fair to portray them as leading it, as we did. Our bad. What we were trying to get across is that Germany's enthusiastic participation in the arms race was pursued by the military bureaucracy with little oversight or accountability to the German parliament. It serves as an important example of how bureaucratic independence from accountability in Germany contributed to its militarism.
Why did you imitate Napoleon with a British accent??? Instead of trying and failing to be funny you should just be like Kraut and actually give information.
@@anthonywarren9885 I thought it was very funny. Also you realise that was Kraut right? So your dig of "be like kraut - don't try to be funny" doesn't really make any sense.
I've seen your other videos. They were good but this one strikes me as your weakest and most poorly researched yet. -- To start with, the title "The Surprising Reason Germany Loved War SO Much" has absolutely nothing to do with the video's contents. It's big picture idea is about "bureaucracy". -- The picture of "bureaucracy" as a long deep structure applies equally to other nations across the world who've had different trajectories (France, UK with its Civil Service, China's long history with its meritocratic bureaucracy, Ottoman Turkey also had a well-developed bureaucracy), so it's a bit odd why you focus so much on centering this on Germany, subscribing to the very cold war idea of 'bureaucracy=totalitarianism' which many have moved away from. -- There's almost no real research and citation on the scholarship done within Germany after World War II that analysed and responded to your line of inquiry. Hans Ulrich-Wehler's "The German Empire", Fritz Fischer's work analyzing German history, in English you have Ian Kershaw's research, whose famous "Working Towards the Fuhrer" thesis analyzes how the Nazi regime and its genocide functioned in a strange ad-hoc fashion.
Thanks for watching and the thoughtful critique. The Prussian bureaucracy was core to the development of German militarism, so the title is not totally unrelated. We certainly didn't mean to equate bureaucracy with totalitarianism. In the conclusion we explain how it's a matter of bureaucracy + or - accountability (democracy) that makes or breaks this connection. And thanks for the reading recommendation, it's much appreciated!
@@spectacles-dm The Prussian military essence was a worldwide export hit. Also in the USA, see West Point. The Prussian General Steuben made an army out of an armed bunch in the US War of Independence, otherwise they would have been just cannon fodder.
German Historians like Fritz Fischer and Hans Ulrich-Wehler and Volker Ullrich have pretty consistently laid primary agency for the outbreak of the war on Imperial Germany @@extantfellow46
@@spectacles-dm Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Germany's beaurocracy sure is at the core of Hannah Arendt's comment on the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem. Everyone expected Eichmann to be this sinister otherworldly diabolical maniac. But the man who was known to be one of the major organizers of the Holocaust came across as an overly unremarkable Hanswurst with no particular charisma unable to even make one sentence that wasn't a cliché. An ordinary modern man. This is what Arendt called the "banality of evil". It was an honest observation but it didn't actually explain anything. And this leads me to my criticism of this video. I would not recommend even implicitly suggesting Germany's beaurocracy to be the reason for Auschwitz or the type of man Eichmann was. Such a narrative unwittingly tends to undermine the absoloute irrational core of Nazi-Germany and in extend cannot explain "Why Germany Loved War...for Centuries".
Just watched the video. Really good and well researched. I especally liked the crisp sound effects 😃 have you read some of Kafkas work? Many of his works deal with Bureaucracy but more in a surreal manner Greetings from your Fukuoka Friend😎
most strong European powers like france or Britain: have military to get a big colonial empire around the world, prussia: gets a strong military to just survive and later unifying a people who are the same, world: thats illegal 😲
Outstanding video. Although the overall tone is that "administration did bad things". But I don't really see how it would do that without broad public support. The administration was made of people and the "other" people were also quite enthusiastic about ultranationalistic messaging and war, weren't they?
The banality of evil Eichmann, the main organizer and logistics brain behind the Holocaust, was put on trial in Israel and he basically said he "just wanted to do his job and get promoted". He just treated it as part of his job like people who eat meat but dont think about how meat is produced for example. For him most of what he did was statistics, train schedules, number games. People have done all kinds of fucked up shit in the past without being psychopaths. I mean technically every allied bomber pilot is a war criminal because he bombed civilians as well. Do bomber pilots think about how their bombs will burn women, children and elederly alive or suffocate them in their shelters? Of course not, they get told its "for the greater good". Same story as with the nazis and their henchmen. a good beurocrat is not to question his orders, he is to make sure they are executed properly. Giving the orders is another depardment.
as if people can't easily be pressured with carrots and sticks, big carrots and big sticks. and you should observe in your daily life that most people don't even need that - just some abstract cultural dominance over what is considered moral will do the trick (pronouns and canceling, anyone?).
I'll always take a recommendation from Kraut, as I know he's a man of the highest moral principles. Having said that, this video is wonderfully studied, provides me with a genuinely either unique or rarely acknowledged perspective, and is perfectly compressed and produced. I've subscribed and hit notifications, PLEASE keep these coming!
Kraut did vomit when he reviewed the Ethan Ralph micro peen sex video frame by frame with a Canadian tranny, which means he does have standards and is repulsed by disgusting things, so maybe, just maybe, you are right in your assesment good sir. Have a nice day.
The catch 22 has always been - Something gets big enough, it needs a bureaucracy to manage it. The bureaucrats think they are an end unto themselves, not a means to an end.
I never knew bureaucracies operates on their own, well people make and execute the decisions but they were predetermined by incentives and power structure, michael lipsky street level bureaucracy changed how I view government and public officials.
Also it was unclear which reforms Frederick William III pushed for (per Wikipedia *before* the 1806 Jena-Auerstadt loss to Napoléon) and did not achieve, and which were foisted upon him *after* the battle by his bureaucrats despite his protests. But maybe this is essentially difficult to tease out from the historical documents themselves. Amazing video!
You did another video on "The End of History and The Last Man" from Francis Fukuyama, and this video now has me wondering if you read is more up-to-date work "Political Order and Political Decay" Edit: Nevermind, got to the end of the video, lol.
When Germany unified after the Franco pressman war, the other nations of Europe felt threatened! So they started an arms race! And all it took to start a war was one minor?😮 incident?
The German Empire is the one to hold responsible for the escalation into a world war. If they hadn't invaded neutral nations like Belgium and Luxemburg the British wouldn't have been involved etc. etc. If the Germans acted more profound the war would have been another European conflict but they overestimated their capabilities because of the staunch feeling of military superiority.
7:42 If the Americans had done this in iraq instead of de-bathization then you wouldn't have had the rise of ISIS because the Sunni former bureaucrats would have had a stake in the new government, if you isolate groups you don't give them a chance to reform. So NO it was not distasteful, it probably prevented the rise of a more extreme party in the aftermath.
You make a good point, and would probably enjoy our video about Iraq. I still think "letting Nazis have their jobs back" is pretty much the definition of "distasteful," and our point is basically that "distasteful" and "wise" can, often must, coexist.
@@spectacles-dm fair enough, that makes a lot of sense. It doesn't take much courage to exact revenge on your enemies after they are defeated, which creates resentment in the survivors and martyrs of the fallen. But forgiveness in the secular sense is a much more powerful tool that both humiliates your enemy's ideology and binds the defeated (after you have executed the leadership ofc, think Operation paperclip).
That would be in a perfect world. It became clear, the person that Bush put in charge, knew nothing about the history of the Middle East & was a dummy. The final outcome of Iraq, is what Iran wanted; a satellite state. Bush & his incompetents are considered war criminals & liars to many people. v
@@spectacles-dm I would not even call it personally distasteful. How many of us could have been on the frontlines of the eastern or western fronts, fighting the allies, or genociding jews and slavs, or so on.
@@Cecilia-ky3uw this isn't about front line soldiers getting jobs. It's about Nazi higher ups remaining at the center of power. A lot of old Volksgerichtshof Justices (the people who sentenced you to death for telling a joke about the Führer on your way to work) had their hand in creating the modern legal system in Germany and were responsible for persecuting War criminals. Would it surprise you, that almost all of the people involved got VERY lienient sentences?
The title is a bit misleading, Every nation loved war for these centuries, sometimes going up and down. But generally before World War 1 war was popular. But the video is specifically about Germany, so it's understandable.
Here's a follow-up question to the dilemma presented at the end of the video: How does good governance withstand abuse in general? This is a good look at how/why Germany did it, and I find other examples like Singapore and China (to an extent) very interesting, but how do we replicate it?
@@wednes3day Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Although I think you're partly right, you prove why liberals aren't good at analyzing history. We need to accept the uncomfortable side of our reality to understand history its self.
"Everyone knows Germany loved starting wars." Germany didn't start WW1 and they didn't declare war on France and Britain in WW2 either. Germany was involved in about half as many wars throughout its existence than France, Britain and Russia, including the pre-1871 unification. Is France a war-loving country because Napoleon decided one day that all of Europe should bow to his whims? Is Britain war-happy because it literally conquered 1/4 of the Earth? What about Russia, which stretches from one continent to another. What about the US, which has been involved is basically every war of the past 200 years, whether directly or indirectly? Absolutely blatant hypocrisy. You trust your TV, that's all this video proves. There's an alarming rise of pseudo-intellectual youtube channels making pseudo-historical videos about Germany, but I guess it always has been and always will be an extremely popular and profitable market. All you have to do to get rich is write a book about how uniquely evil Germany is, and all you have to do to get views and subscribers is adapt that biased hypocritical view for youtube. Absolutely disgusting.
Fun Fact: During his time as chancellor, Otto von Bismarck was very careful with wars against France and Austria-Hungary. He was even able to stop a war in 1968 with France, because he may have been ready for war, but tried his best to avoid them if possible
@@chipsnfish7716 "Anyone who has looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think hard before starting a war" -Otto von Bismarck
I will not watch this video. It would only reward those who work with simple clickbaits at Germany's expense. I'm German and I don't know a single German that I've met in my long life who loves war. But that says a lot about how people really think about us.
I understand it's a generalization. A similar generalization about the gun-nuts in the USA could be made too. People are people. Also, I understand people making their videos have biases. It gives me information to do further reading & understand the complexities of history. v
@@mirquellasantos2716 I haven't started a war yet and I don't know anyone who has started one. I don't know anyone who loves war. none. Incidentally, Germany has been accused for decades of spending too little money on the military. Our share of defense spending in GDP is 1.49%. For comparison: Poland=2.42%, UK=2.16%, France=1.89%, USA 3.46%, Italy=1.51%. If we loved war we would invest a lot more in the Bundeswehr. Only since the Ukraine war has there been a little more investment in the Bundeswehr.
@@bernhardstelzig3779 You forgot to mention that both Germany and Japan are forbidden from military expansion cause both countries were war-mongering out for world domination and committed the worst genocides in the world. But I do have to give credit to the new generation of Germans. They are certainly not monsters like their grand-parents and don't care much about wars. I like the younger Germans.
The German Empire is the one to hold responsible for the escalation into a world war. If they hadn't invaded neutral nations like Belgium and Luxemburg the British wouldn't have been involved etc. etc. If the Germans acted more profound the war would have been another European conflict but they overestimated their capabilities because of the staunch feeling of military superiority.
@@extantfellow46 France and Britain wasn't officially allied back then. The UK joined the war because they guaranteed Belgium independence. They had good relations to France but they had signed any treaties saying they would defend France in case of an invasion. Hadn't Germany invaded Belgium and Luxemburg the British wouldn't have joined the war.
@@leomarreyes6011 Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
You should read Iron Kingdom, by Christopher Clark. Argueably, Prussia was one of the most peaceful nations of the 19th century in Europe, as it fought in only eleven wars. Other great powers fought constantly wars all around the world. Were you to compare France or GB to Prussia, you would be astonished. Having seen this episode and the episode on Iraq, I have to say that this channel pretends to be the all knowing, independent, academipster whatever.... you guys know what I mean... but it is poorly researched. Thats all!
Democracy isn't an ideal. The ideal would be perfect protection of all individual rights bundled with perfect society cohesion and coordination of resources. Democracy doesn't come close to either. Democracy is just marginally better than most other forms of government, that's it.
This has provided good insight as to why, compared to other developed economies, Germany lags so far behind digitization. It's been resisted by an older, more conservative paper pushing bureaucracy.
"Germany started two world wars". Uuuuh no. The first world war was started by Austria-Hungary, with German backing, yes, but still pretty unfair to say that they started two world wars.
Germany only said she would mobilize if Russia attacked. She agreed something had to be done about the assassination in Sarajevo, a question of honor and respect but never that she would participate in it. Here's the quote: "Finally, as far as concerns Serbia, His Majesty, of course, cannot interfere in the dispute now going on between Austria-Hungary and that country, as it is a matter not within his competence. The Emperor Francis Joseph may, however, rest assured that His Majesty will faithfully stand by Austria-Hungary, as is required by the obligations of his alliance and of his ancient friendship."
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
The character, culture and organization of nazi germany was decidedly not Prussian. It was more Bavarian in character than anything else. The anti-intellectual sentiment of the regime was hardly bureaucratic. Part of their rise to power was emphasizing how different they were from imperial germany! This video is flashy and visually professional but the thesis is bonkers
10:30 Well in Iraq and in Afganistan, where the democracy was forced, the whole system just felt apart extreme quickly. Ű Thanks to the mindless Americans!
This video is full of half truths and gross mischaracterizations. I actually believe this sort of "educational" short video format style is much worse than no "education", because it rather entertains and gives the illusion of learning something, than actually learning anything real.
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Germany did not start ww1. The 4 pairs of boots aren't the ones to fire the first shot they just had lots of money and they were on the opposing side no good blaming the slavs no cash
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
The DPRK is a socialist democracy, I am sure there are a few other modern examples of dictatorship of the proletariat (i.e. democracy). Maybe Iran but that's more religiously orientated, maybe you can say it's socialism but instead of class they use religious orientation.
Why Germany Loved War...for Centuries? Hummm, let's see... British Wars, 2nd half of the 19th Century (1850-1900) Second Anglo-Burmese War (1852) Eureka Rebellion (1854) Åland War (1854-56) Anglo-Persian War (1856-57) Second Opium War (1856-60) Indian Rebellion (1857-59) Revolt of Rajab Ali (1857-58) Kagoshima (1863) Ambela campaign (1863-64) Shimonoseki (1864) Duar War (1864-65) Fenian Rebellion in Canada (1866-71) Abyssinia (1868) Manitoba (1870) Perak (1875-76) Anglo-Zulu War (1879) Second Anglo-Afghan War (1879-80) Basutoland (1880-81)First Boer War (1880-81) Mahdist War (1881-99) Anglo-Egyptian War (1882)Saskatchewan (1885) Third Anglo-Burmese War (1885) Central Africa (1886-89) Hazara (1888) Mashonaland (1890) Hunza-Nagar Campaign (1891)Anglo-Manipur War (1891)Pahang Uprising (1891-1895) Matabeleland (1893-94) North Borneo (1894-1905) Chitral Expedition (1895) Jameson Raid South Africa (1896) Anglo-Zanzibar War (1896) Matabeleland (1896-97) Benin Expedition (1897) Siege of Malakand (1897) First Mohmand campaign (1897-98) Tirah campaign (1897-98) Six-Day War (1899) Boxer Rebellion (1898-1901) Second Boer War (1899-1902) ------------- German Wars, Same Period Franco-Prussian War, 1870-71
Oh, forgot the Austro-Prussian War of 1866. And by the way, there was no German military buildup starting a European one, Wilhelm II had never fought a war in his life before 1914 and he didn't wish for, nor plan, start, perpetrate or lose that war on the battlefield, it lost the war in the dark backrooms of the Palais de Versailles where it had not been invited, absent of it's very own trial, judgement and sentencing. Prosperity can put you in deep trouble sometimes doesn't it?
Because this isn't true at all Germany never loved and it wasn't them who started ww1,it was Austria Hungary and Russia, Prussia was the one that kept being bullied by France Britain Poland the Ottomans Austria Hungary and Russia were the ones who kept going to war with Prussia (which is now Germany)
@@rosesprog1722 thank you,I am fed up of these narrow minded agendist alway using Germany as a scapegoat to paint a narrative their hypocrisy couldn't even be measured.
@@hamzahnurreez8420 Unfortunately, that's about all there is here on YT, people with strong opinions about things they know nothing about, YT is the official voice of the official story and anything else risks being deleted. Fortunately there are interesting sources and forums where people know how to study history, but you won't find them here. I'm here for the great variety of videos on all topics, entertainment, period. Cheers.
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 They didn't attack Belgium, they asked politely twice for the permission to walk through without damaging anything but the Belgians, having secretly been given a "blank check" by the British decided to fight the much more powerful German army (just like Poland did a few years later) under the pretext of defending her neutrality, which didn't exist anymore following her entente with the British. Therefore Germany did not attack Belgium and did not breach her neutrality either. Furthermore, when the Germans went in Luxembourg, the Belgian ambassador had not finished burning his secret files so the Germans found all the documents they needed to prove they were not guilty of the crimes they were accused of. But to no avail, the British, the French and the Russians had decided before the war had even begun and for each their own reasons that Germany was becoming too prosperous too fast and that fair competition would not be useful in this case, therefore the British, who were in fact behind it all of this, began in the early 1900s to travel all over the world, trying to make as many secret alliances as possible. They made many but still, Germany was holding her own surprisingly well. BUT, when Wall Street, who had lent way too much money to the Brits and the French forced Wilson to break his electoral promise to stay out of the war to prevent a German victory, which would have meant total ruin for them, Continued...
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 Of course, when the Yanks came in, the fragile balance that would have probably ended the war in a truce was broken. Germany was destroyed, anger, resentment, death, starvation, poverty, depravity, strikes, unemployment, despair AND WW2 followed, caused by the greed and the stupidity of those at Versailles who said that outrageous punishment was how you prevent wars when in fact, the real intent was to eliminate an industrial and commercial competitor... they didn't think about the consequences their short sighted decisions might bring about, so they failed, were directly responsible for another war, the death and destruction of which were on a scale never seen before, again recruited the whole world and blamed and crushed Germany with such brutality this time, a nation of traditions, beauty, culture, innovation, her people, their pride and their very identity were almost eliminated from the surface of this earth, saved at the last moment by the savage expansionist aggressions of the same communist regime the Germans had tried so hard to save themselves and the rest of Europe from, a strange but heaven sent irony.
@@rosesprog1722 exactly what I wanted to say, but have no power anymore for typing that much about the facts which are easily available if one tries to search.
I could not fully find your info elsewhere. "Germany" as an entity did not exist de facto for, let's say 1900 years AFTER Caesar's life - the fact that about EVERY neighbouring state calls them differently should tell the apt listener/reader A LOT. In "De Bello Gasllico" he talked about the tribe of the "germanii", the "ubii" (modern northrhine-westphalia), some "suebi", a tribe called the "usipetes/usipii" and the "tencteri" tribe. At best he chose to elaborate on ONE tribe due to particularities (especially: the unwillingness to relent and be made a roman colony...) Caesar's "De Bello Gallico", Book 4 and 6 are interesting (in which, today ironically the Gallians have been described as "formerly more warloving and skilled at warfare than the Germanics"...). Reducing the "modern" (1871 - today) german state to this reductionistic farce of a history video with MANY small and bigger errors is a disservice to history.
Interesting video. But you could also have explained why militarism also caused Germany's downfall in both world wars. Because yes, it did. Prussian militarism favourited aggressive foreign diplomacy and short-term war strategies. For example, the german empire couldnt build a good ally network, they never tried to defuse the austrian-serbian tensions, they attacked France and Russia without being threatened, and they thaught they could just win a war against all of Europe just with their doctrine and technology. And that's just for ww1. No need to make a list of all of Germany's diplomatic and military blunders during ww2
this is so utterly stupid. For most of its history Germany was divided into multiple states and was victim of war for centuries- for example the 30 years war that killed half the population. etc Germany only unified about 150 years ago.
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia. Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
This video totally misses the point. The real problem is that countries like Prussia/Germany and Russia have answered incorrectly the following question: Are we a country that can win wars by letting the enemy into our homeland, or are we a country which must keep the enemy away at all costs? - England is a prime example for the latter: Every true invader (coming with force like the Romans or William the Bastard in 1066) maintained their conquests and set turning points in English history; plus England must keep its traderoutes and ports open (Another example was Carthage, which always lost, when it got invaded and/or lost its fleet). But most countries can afford letting the enemy in, losing homeground and turn the war into a home match. Germany and Russia suffered from many raids (Huns, Hungarians, Thirty Years War resp. Mongols, Tatars, Turks) but not from throne-threatening invasions, they confused and came to the wrong conclusion that they must carry the war to their enemies.
@@lilestojkovicii6618The empire that deadass negotiated with terrorist assassins after proving they were supported by a neighboring country, which happened to be protected by a huge empire with the biggest army on Earth and an outrageously unreasonable leadership, if they're to blame then blame has no meaning.
@@dandre3K except they werent supported by the government Black hand was not government organisation, it had one member in it and he supported the assasins with his own money anyways Government didnt knew anything untill it was too late Oh and not to mention how irationally Ferdinands driver behaved that day Oh and Government actually accepted the proposals of Austria except you know the last one that basically said we are sending our armed police across your border to investigate in your country and you should let them do it freely (basically independent state needed to give up part of its rights for the hostile empire to do "investigation" aka preparing for future invasion) Not to mention how Austrians hated Serbia since the day Peter I took the throne because they no longer wanted to be their puppet and didnt want to be silent about systemic oppression of Serbs and other Slav nations on the teritories of the Empire Oh and Russia was a paper tiger that lost to Japan back then like it is today Anyways cope we won and you lost I dont have time to reason with a random brainwashed person on the Internet
Thank you for making this video. I hope more people adopt a more critical view of German militarism.
And thank you for your help!
Kraut. Did you know that first and second world wars where not started by Germans, but Russians. I base this argument on two facts. First world war; russians where the ones who funded and organized Serbian terrorists shell in Austria-Hungary. Second world war; Germany would have never attacked Poland whiout Russian support. And they did attack poland together whit Germans.
@@matiasovaska3652 the First World War, maybe, but to blame the second on Russia is silly. The Molotov Ribbentrop pact came AFTER the west signed treaties with germany
Wait are you telling me that someone thinks German militarism was fine and dandy? Well... Anyone who doesn't already have a large collection of German war memorabilia, if you catch my drift?
@@matiasovaska3652 Russia may have enabled Germany but that is absolutely not the same thing as causing. I'm guessing you arent familiar with the treaty of Rapallo, are you?
"Notable contempt for France"
Idk dude sounds pretty sane to me
🤣🤣🤣
He just like me for real.
Contempt For France Leads To Disaster, France Is The Cultural Capital Of Europe
@@spectacles-dm Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, and Slavs as a "race" ever since King Boleslaw gave Polish land to Prussia to protect Catholics against Pagans and persecution... boy was he wrong.
The desire for a strong military is what happens when you get treated like a battlefield for centuries. Turns out nobody likes getting invaded on like 4 different fronts.
All of Europe was a battlefield back then. Germany wasn’t very special in that regard.
@@achyuthansanal That's why Germany wasn't alone in sustaining a large military.
@@achyuthansanal All of Europe has been a battlefield for centuries. But Germany did suffer disproportionally in "relatively" modern times leading to the attitude of militarism that has plagued the country in the 19th and 20th centuries.
@@achyuthansanal actually Germany was special in that regard Spain has naturally defensible borders thanks to mountains France only has a small part of its borders that arent naturally defensible (the border with Belgium) and was for centuries Europe's dominant power. Britain is an Island etc etc etc. Its not coincidence that germany was militaristic to the extent that it was and that it was often the aggressor looking to create natural borders prevent french dominance and gain access to resources/curb Russian expansion in the east.
@@achyuthansanal well tbh it comes from the 100 years war and medievil europe and yes the geographical area of germany has had the most conflict in europe
Out of necessity, Prussia needed a well organized bureaucracy, something Germany inherited. You know, this is a deeper dive when it comes to Germany's military history.
Societies don't need bureaucracy at all--not one that has arbitrary power over your life. America operated and advanced for 130+ years with a very small Constitutionally limited government.
@@MaxAbramson3 And look where they ended up: segregated society with a second-class citizenry, robber-barons, destruction of beautiful natural scenery and eventually the most devastating economic downturn in the nation’s history
@@MaxAbramson3 America has always had bureaucracies it was just instead of a large centralized one it was hundreds of smaller bureaucracies that operated sometimes our National level sometimes on the state and sometimes on the county level. It was only when America had to deal with a Civil War and raise massive armies and then afterwords had to deal with massive monopolies that could overpower every single smaller bureaucracy it had to make and empowered big bureaucracies.
@@set_5341 For 200 years, almost everything was handled at the local level.
@@MaxAbramson3 Yes and that worked in America because America was isolated from countries that actually posed a threat to it didn’t have to be ruthlessly efficient with its resources or run humongous armies. It was only when slave plan Tatian owners became aristocrats and tried to break away and then the US had to deal with the first companies worth hundreds of millions that could just bribe their way through local and state bureaucracies. The USA was forced to buy the voters to build bigger more meritocratic bureaucracy as that was seen as the only way to keep rule of law and individual rights by a large amount of voters. And then WW2 happened which required A humongous military and civilian bureaucracy to wage efficiently which America build.
"God created war so Americans would learn geography." - Mark Twain.
There is war but still Americans don’t know geography
@@avus-kw2f213and thank the powers that stupified the americans to get more votes,start new wars and maintain their power(Demoncrats)
They suck at geography and history.
LOL true honestly
Wait, isn't Geography an african country ?
you did not just call Bismarck a Psycho.
The video never mentions Bismarck???
@@thepbrit did you, did you watch the same video I did?
@@kommandantgalileo Yes I did, the only time the term psycho is used is in reference to Frederick William I (1:50), and Bismarck is never mentioned by name (although some images used are likely of him, but I can't confirm)
EDIT: Forgive me, I forgot the first part of the video and was mainly focussing on the main part of the video where they were actually making points
@@thepbrit I'll have to rewatch this video, even if it is stupidly bias.
@@kommandantgalileo As you can see from my edit, I do agree the intro of the video is flawed, I do find that the rest of the video is a fairly neutral telling of the power of bureaucracy in Prussia and Germany and how those institutions were instrumental what made Germany what it is, both good and bad
A fascinating look at how good bureaucracy is a through line of much of pre and post German unification history. The ending discussion about the kind of chicken and egg problem with bureaucracy is also interesting. Does good bureaucracy lead to good democracy, or vice versa?
As a German this Video title feels like an insult. "... loved war SO much" really?
If it the titles was something like "What enabled Germany... " or anything like that, it would be fine. But the actual one implies that Germans were craving war for 300-400 years straight and that is just wrong.
Germany is located right in the middle of Europe and always had powerful neighbours back until the Roman empire expanded to the Rhine. And with us Humans beeing what we are its, sadly, logical that there was one war after another for two millenia. Because overly ambitious people inside and outside of germany were always all so willing to sacrifice countless lifes for their personal goals. THEY might have loved war. But surely not the widow, the orphan or the Soldier dying in the mud.
If i was to make a Video about the US fighting in Korea and Vietnam and thus would Name it "Why does America like killing Asian people so much?" it would be equaly insulting and misleading. So please get that straight. Well made content does not need clickbait.
I think you're right. What he also gets wrong is saying germany started two world wars. The first world war was started by austro-hungary, which forced germany to fight because of the treaty. Not because of bloodlust
@@unavlble Yes. Germany had its share in the start of WWI. But saying they started it, like it was some Solo yolo endevour is a gross oversimplification. As far as i know Germany mobilised its troops last.
Phenomenal response! I had the same thoughts when watching the video, it seemed almost anti-german in a sense. Especially when bringing up Prussian contempt for France without stating France's blatant expansionism in the 17th, 18, and most importantly 19th century. France didn't get Strasbourg because they asked nicely...
@@unavlble did you ever hear of the "Blankoscheck"?
You clearly haven't been on TH-cam long enough. Sadly the algorithms really favor bold and controversial titles, and chances are sadly high that if they took your advice, you would never have clicked on the video in the first place 🥲
2:00 "notable contempt for France" me too bro, me too
6:12 I highly recommend reading about Kurt Von Schleicher. He was German chancellor during Weimar Germany who personified the old conservatives who mainly dominated the republic. He is a key factor of how early the Nazi party gained strength and power up until ultimate dominance in 1933. Interesting video btw. A more critical view on Prussian and eventual German militarism. Though some parts I felt lacked context. Could just be me nitpicking though
There's *always* room for improvement, but we're so glad you enjoyed the video. Yes! He is a very important character...
Yeah and then he was killed for it. Nazis didn't like traditional establishment guys that didn't cooperate with them.
Honestly, that description would fit far more aptly for Franz von Papen, Schleicher’s predecessor. As a landowning and politically unfamiliar man, he was subject to ridicule as that personification of “Old Germany” even during his tenure as chancellor.
Schleicher was more complex. Besides arguing for decidedly left-leaning economic policies (even being branded “the Red General”), he was also rather pragmatic and opposed to the rising threat of Nazism that would later cause not only his downfall but also cost his life.
@@hanspetrich6520 Agreed. Although the Nazis didn't really respect him either, only seeing him as a useful tool to achieve more power. And when they didn't need him anymore, they just sent him off to be an ambassador to places like Austria and Turkey. Oh and Papen was also the intended target of a planned false flag attack by the Nazis to justify sending their troops into Austria.
@@spectacles-dm Honestly this video of yours is a shitshow of misrepresentation based on nothing but anti-german sentiment. Prussia was less militaristic than other European powers during it's time of existence, while Prussia was defending itself from it's neighbors and organizing itself other European countries conquered almost the entire world. And the Weimar Republic didn't fell because of conservatives in the German bureaucracy, but because it had never the support of the German population in the first place. The German Emperor abdicated because of the outbreak of soldier mutinies and revolts among the German population, yet the German Social Democrats got into office without any rights and declared the Weimar Republic on their own. Their first order of buisness was to ally themselves with the military junta, which had replaced the German Emperor over the course of WW1 as the defacto rulers of Germany. They then organized the Freicorps, who gunned down the mutinies and revolts that caused the abdication of the German Emperor in the first place. This act of betrayel and machiavellian grab for power lead to a hatred and distrust of the new Weimar ruling class from which the Weimar republic could never recover from.
Your video appeared in my recommendations list four months after its publication date, and honestly, it spoiled my day. I don't really want to know if the rest is like this one, and moreover, your audience already seems to be big enough at least.
Please don't show Bismarck besides Hilter and call him a psycho, that's really not fair to him. He would have found Hitler appalling just like the rest of the Prussian elite later in time.
Thank you normal human being! I‘ve recently read a book about him, and the more I learned from his decisions and thoughts, the more I realized that he has been much calmer and thoughtful than I initially suggested
@@chipsnfish7716 bro I can strongly recommend you to read Sebastian Haffner - he has several really good books, also one called "From Bismarck to Hitler". His books are so good you should really give it a shot :)
He wasn’t exactly a nice guy
@@Noidonteatbabiesstopasking churchill and FDR werent either
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
3:03 napoleon's actually tall for the times
The love of bureaucracy runs deep in Germany. Reminds me of the effectiveness of the WW2 Passierschein surrender leaflet. The German efficiency thing is a myth though. Organized, yes. Efficient, no way. If anything the bureaucracy there greatly hinders any kind of efficiency (which you kind of hinted at when you mentioned the resistance to modernization)
That pink leaflet is such a good insight to the German zeitgeist. Great point!
this reminds me of Japanese bureaucracy which often in power rivals even the most well known politicians.
In a 1975 article, political scientist Chalmers Johnson quotes a retired vice minister of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry who said that the Japanese Diet was merely "an extension of the bureaucracy". The official claimed that "the bureaucracy drafts all the laws.... All the legislature does is to use its powers of investigation, which for about half the year keeps most of the senior officials cooped up in the Diet."
This is the most appalling example of biased history I have come across, Germany was surrounded by other countries on its land borders and felt constantly threatened, eg. France, Poland, Russia and their cousins the Austrians. I would point out that England, France, Russia etc participated in more wars than Germany, which was not united until 1870 (After France declared war on the Germans) and even then Bavaria was semi independent. There is a whole lot of reasons for the rise of Hitler including that the Weimar Republic was unable to control the extremes of both the right and left (which left the mass of the citizenry in fear) and even then he was a minority government but once he got the levers of government then all dissent was crushed within Germany. See how Russia ended up after the Bolshevik coup of 1917.
The truth hurts, right. Hitler came to power cause Germans gave him power by voting and supporting him. Also spare me the part that Germans didn't know cause they did. The wanted world domination just like their leader and blamed the Jews for their problems.
The thing is… what is your point?
None of this video contradicts that. What parts was he biased about? I agree he definitely shows bias in his videos but this isn’t an example of that.
@@Raptor810Blue My point was that Germany was not uniquely bellicose which is what was implied in the presentation
The whole video sounded like a big nothing burger to me. A lot of fancy words, yes, but it genuinely felt like the whole argument was: why was bureaucracy bad? Because it existed in Germany.
@@ComanderSazabi2000 Are you kidding me? The point is that the power of the Bureaucracy (especially the military) over government allowed it to push the country to constant war
One of my favorite book series has a “secret weapon” that ended up being bureaucracy. So yes, bureaucracy is the secret weapon
The title is both incorrect and misleading regarding the content of the video. What you are doing in this video is basically throwing around some buzzwords or cliche phrases (e.g. German bureaucracy, Militarism, etc.). At no point you explain what is unique or special about bureaucracy in Germany as opposed to any other nation, why or how does it lead to wars. And most importantly, as other commenters have also pointed out, it is just factually incorrect to claim that Germany has any kind of love or special interest for wars.
The Germans developed a bureaucracy earlier than French, British, or other countries
@@mint8648 Even if that's true (which I doubt, after all many Prussian reforms carried out by Friedrich Wilhelm the Great Elector were modelled on Dutch cities), how does it explain Germans' love for war?
@@archilkitiashvili1227 Because the German bureaucracy was staffed with various military leaders, and bureaucrats often held greater political authority than the monarchy and parliament
Special thanks to our good friend Kraut for lending his incredible voice to Mr. Bonaparte. French people please reply angrily about Napoleon’s voice, and Hohenzollern stans please share your favorite 🤡 WACKY 😂 Frederick William I moments!
- SOURCES AND CORRECTIONS -
www.spectacles.news/mini-doc-the-weird-reason-germany-loved-war-so-much/
05:49 - a number of comments have pointed out Germany didn't start WWI. That's true. While they participated in the arms race, it's not quite fair to portray them as leading it, as we did. Our bad. What we were trying to get across is that Germany's enthusiastic participation in the arms race was pursued by the military bureaucracy with little oversight or accountability to the German parliament. It serves as an important example of how bureaucratic independence from accountability in Germany contributed to its militarism.
Why did you imitate Napoleon with a British accent??? Instead of trying and failing to be funny you should just be like Kraut and actually give information.
@@anthonywarren9885 I thought it was very funny. Also you realise that was Kraut right? So your dig of "be like kraut - don't try to be funny" doesn't really make any sense.
when he tried to kill his son
I know you wanted to put it out earlier, but i thought it was a rule not to put out good serious content like this on April 1st
bruh we are so dumb - literally didn't realize it was April 1 🤦♂️
I've seen your other videos. They were good but this one strikes me as your weakest and most poorly researched yet.
-- To start with, the title "The Surprising Reason Germany Loved War SO Much" has absolutely nothing to do with the video's contents. It's big picture idea is about "bureaucracy".
-- The picture of "bureaucracy" as a long deep structure applies equally to other nations across the world who've had different trajectories (France, UK with its Civil Service, China's long history with its meritocratic bureaucracy, Ottoman Turkey also had a well-developed bureaucracy), so it's a bit odd why you focus so much on centering this on Germany, subscribing to the very cold war idea of 'bureaucracy=totalitarianism' which many have moved away from.
-- There's almost no real research and citation on the scholarship done within Germany after World War II that analysed and responded to your line of inquiry. Hans Ulrich-Wehler's "The German Empire", Fritz Fischer's work analyzing German history, in English you have Ian Kershaw's research, whose famous "Working Towards the Fuhrer" thesis analyzes how the Nazi regime and its genocide functioned in a strange ad-hoc fashion.
Thanks for watching and the thoughtful critique. The Prussian bureaucracy was core to the development of German militarism, so the title is not totally unrelated. We certainly didn't mean to equate bureaucracy with totalitarianism. In the conclusion we explain how it's a matter of bureaucracy + or - accountability (democracy) that makes or breaks this connection.
And thanks for the reading recommendation, it's much appreciated!
@@spectacles-dm The Prussian military essence was a worldwide export hit. Also in the USA, see West Point. The Prussian General Steuben made an army out of an armed bunch in the US War of Independence, otherwise they would have been just cannon fodder.
German Historians like Fritz Fischer and Hans Ulrich-Wehler and Volker Ullrich have pretty consistently laid primary agency for the outbreak of the war on Imperial Germany @@extantfellow46
@@spectacles-dm Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
the title is misleading, it's all about bureaucracy
Always making germany the villain bruh
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Germany's beaurocracy sure is at the core of Hannah Arendt's comment on the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem. Everyone expected Eichmann to be this sinister otherworldly diabolical maniac. But the man who was known to be one of the major organizers of the Holocaust came across as an overly unremarkable Hanswurst with no particular charisma unable to even make one sentence that wasn't a cliché. An ordinary modern man. This is what Arendt called the "banality of evil". It was an honest observation but it didn't actually explain anything.
And this leads me to my criticism of this video. I would not recommend even implicitly suggesting Germany's beaurocracy to be the reason for Auschwitz or the type of man Eichmann was. Such a narrative unwittingly tends to undermine the absoloute irrational core of Nazi-Germany and in extend cannot explain "Why Germany Loved War...for Centuries".
Just watched the video. Really good and well researched. I especally liked the crisp sound effects 😃 have you read some of Kafkas work? Many of his works deal with Bureaucracy but more in a surreal manner
Greetings from your Fukuoka Friend😎
most strong European powers like france or Britain: have military to get a big colonial empire around the world, prussia: gets a strong military to just survive and later unifying a people who are the same, world: thats illegal 😲
seems like i am too late for anyone to notice my comments
I live in Italy and bureaucracy is the bane of my life.... this video, for the first time, made bureaucracy interesting to me ❤
The reichstag of the German empire controlled the budget. So the democratic element of government still held significant power
Outstanding video. Although the overall tone is that "administration did bad things". But I don't really see how it would do that without broad public support. The administration was made of people and the "other" people were also quite enthusiastic about ultranationalistic messaging and war, weren't they?
The banality of evil
Eichmann, the main organizer and logistics brain behind the Holocaust, was put on trial in Israel and he basically said he "just wanted to do his job and get promoted". He just treated it as part of his job like people who eat meat but dont think about how meat is produced for example. For him most of what he did was statistics, train schedules, number games.
People have done all kinds of fucked up shit in the past without being psychopaths. I mean technically every allied bomber pilot is a war criminal because he bombed civilians as well. Do bomber pilots think about how their bombs will burn women, children and elederly alive or suffocate them in their shelters? Of course not, they get told its "for the greater good". Same story as with the nazis and their henchmen.
a good beurocrat is not to question his orders, he is to make sure they are executed properly. Giving the orders is another depardment.
as if people can't easily be pressured with carrots and sticks, big carrots and big sticks.
and you should observe in your daily life that most people don't even need that - just some abstract cultural dominance over what is considered moral will do the trick (pronouns and canceling, anyone?).
It's бюджетники or bureaucrats, who chose Putin in elections through all of these 20, years
Same in Belarus
Great analysis!
Wow, interesting perspective, although historically very wrong as too one-dimensional.
I'll always take a recommendation from Kraut, as I know he's a man of the highest moral principles. Having said that, this video is wonderfully studied, provides me with a genuinely either unique or rarely acknowledged perspective, and is perfectly compressed and produced. I've subscribed and hit notifications, PLEASE keep these coming!
Kraut did vomit when he reviewed the Ethan Ralph micro peen sex video frame by frame with a Canadian tranny, which means he does have standards and is repulsed by disgusting things, so maybe, just maybe, you are right in your assesment good sir. Have a nice day.
Made in Austria, when it comes to Hitler btw
"fly into anger for someone daring to mention France" Yeah, that's me. My lawyer has advised me to not finish the rest of this comment.
The catch 22 has always been -
Something gets big enough, it needs a bureaucracy to manage it.
The bureaucrats think they are an end unto themselves, not a means to an end.
5:48 I don't like how you are trying to paint the picture that Germany was the one to blame for ww1.
Me neither, but unfortunately, that's what most people think.
I never knew bureaucracies operates on their own, well people make and execute the decisions but they were predetermined by incentives and power structure, michael lipsky street level bureaucracy changed how I view government and public officials.
Prussia was not a kingdom in the 17th century
Also it was unclear which reforms Frederick William III pushed for (per Wikipedia *before* the 1806 Jena-Auerstadt loss to Napoléon) and did not achieve, and which were foisted upon him *after* the battle by his bureaucrats despite his protests. But maybe this is essentially difficult to tease out from the historical documents themselves. Amazing video!
You did another video on "The End of History and The Last Man" from Francis Fukuyama, and this video now has me wondering if you read is more up-to-date work "Political Order and Political Decay"
Edit: Nevermind, got to the end of the video, lol.
Another great video
Thanks so much :)
When Germany unified after the Franco pressman war, the other nations of Europe felt threatened! So they started an arms race! And all it took to start a war was one minor?😮 incident?
Germany didn´t start two world wars - at most it started one. The other one is a more complicated story.....
Both of them are a complicated story, the second one even more so than the first.
"Complicated"?
@@major_kukri2430very.
@@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis no
The German Empire is the one to hold responsible for the escalation into a world war. If they hadn't invaded neutral nations like Belgium and Luxemburg the British wouldn't have been involved etc. etc.
If the Germans acted more profound the war would have been another European conflict but they overestimated their capabilities because of the staunch feeling of military superiority.
I cracked up on that so-called letter from Napoleon to Josephine. LOL
7:42 If the Americans had done this in iraq instead of de-bathization then you wouldn't have had the rise of ISIS because the Sunni former bureaucrats would have had a stake in the new government, if you isolate groups you don't give them a chance to reform. So NO it was not distasteful, it probably prevented the rise of a more extreme party in the aftermath.
You make a good point, and would probably enjoy our video about Iraq. I still think "letting Nazis have their jobs back" is pretty much the definition of "distasteful," and our point is basically that "distasteful" and "wise" can, often must, coexist.
@@spectacles-dm fair enough, that makes a lot of sense. It doesn't take much courage to exact revenge on your enemies after they are defeated, which creates resentment in the survivors and martyrs of the fallen. But forgiveness in the secular sense is a much more powerful tool that both humiliates your enemy's ideology and binds the defeated (after you have executed the leadership ofc, think Operation paperclip).
That would be in a perfect world. It became clear, the person that Bush put in charge, knew nothing about the history of the Middle East & was a dummy. The final outcome of Iraq, is what Iran wanted; a satellite state. Bush & his incompetents are considered war criminals & liars to many people. v
@@spectacles-dm I would not even call it personally distasteful. How many of us could have been on the frontlines of the eastern or western fronts, fighting the allies, or genociding jews and slavs, or so on.
@@Cecilia-ky3uw this isn't about front line soldiers getting jobs. It's about Nazi higher ups remaining at the center of power. A lot of old Volksgerichtshof Justices (the people who sentenced you to death for telling a joke about the Führer on your way to work) had their hand in creating the modern legal system in Germany and were responsible for persecuting War criminals. Would it surprise you, that almost all of the people involved got VERY lienient sentences?
very nice video
The title is a bit misleading, Every nation loved war for these centuries, sometimes going up and down. But generally before World War 1 war was popular.
But the video is specifically about Germany, so it's understandable.
that hook at the start is fantastic, good work.
Thanks!
Here's a follow-up question to the dilemma presented at the end of the video: How does good governance withstand abuse in general? This is a good look at how/why Germany did it, and I find other examples like Singapore and China (to an extent) very interesting, but how do we replicate it?
Napoleonic language was soo refined and cultural back then…
Germany "started two world wars"? How did Germany start WW1?
By playing the game
@@NulledSeriesthen why even mention it when every European nation co-started it by that logic?
If Austria didn’t call Germany into arms, it would have just been Austria v Serbia and Russia. Germany started the war by joining.
@@wednes3day Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
This video feels heavily biased, to a extreme in fact.
@@extantfellow46 his video on Northern Ireland is stupid too.
@@extantfellow46 indeed.
i wish this video was a few hours long with all the details
Zurzeit des Dreißigjährigen Krieges war Preußen noch kein Königreich. Der Staat wird meistens einfach Brandenburg-Preußen genannt
Pretty myopic view. All of German history reduced to its independent bureaucracy
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
i feel like this is the video that paints the portrait of the soul, the essential spirit, the national characteristic of Germany.
This isn't true at all Germany never loved war and Germany didn't started ww1.
It is bureaucracy, with extra steps!
Although I think you're partly right, you prove why liberals aren't good at analyzing history. We need to accept the uncomfortable side of our reality to understand history its self.
Hello fellow Dude, would you be so kind to elaborate further on this?
10:31 yes just yes.
Where did you find that beautiful kupferstich at 1:33?
"Everyone knows Germany loved starting wars."
Germany didn't start WW1 and they didn't declare war on France and Britain in WW2 either.
Germany was involved in about half as many wars throughout its existence than France, Britain and Russia, including the pre-1871 unification.
Is France a war-loving country because Napoleon decided one day that all of Europe should bow to his whims? Is Britain war-happy because it literally conquered 1/4 of the Earth? What about Russia, which stretches from one continent to another. What about the US, which has been involved is basically every war of the past 200 years, whether directly or indirectly?
Absolutely blatant hypocrisy. You trust your TV, that's all this video proves.
There's an alarming rise of pseudo-intellectual youtube channels making pseudo-historical videos about Germany, but I guess it always has been and always will be an extremely popular and profitable market.
All you have to do to get rich is write a book about how uniquely evil Germany is, and all you have to do to get views and subscribers is adapt that biased hypocritical view for youtube.
Absolutely disgusting.
Fun Fact: During his time as chancellor, Otto von Bismarck was very careful with wars against France and Austria-Hungary. He was even able to stop a war in 1968 with France, because he may have been ready for war, but tried his best to avoid them if possible
@@chipsnfish7716 "Anyone who has looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think hard before starting a war"
-Otto von Bismarck
Hey! Stick to the Script! Nazis Bad! Communists (not as) bad!
What do you mean Germany started two world wars??
I think he doesn't know what he means, he just sounds like it.
Keep em coming
Wait til he hears about France!
Less militaristic bureaucracy they have there
I will not watch this video. It would only reward those who work with simple clickbaits at Germany's expense. I'm German and I don't know a single German that I've met in my long life who loves war.
But that says a lot about how people really think about us.
I understand it's a generalization. A similar generalization about the gun-nuts in the USA could be made too. People are people. Also, I understand people making their videos have biases. It gives me information to do further reading & understand the complexities of history. v
So you don't like wars and started 2 wars. I can imagine if you did like wars.
@@mirquellasantos2716 I haven't started a war yet and I don't know anyone who has started one. I don't know anyone who loves war. none. Incidentally, Germany has been accused for decades of spending too little money on the military. Our share of defense spending in GDP is 1.49%. For comparison: Poland=2.42%, UK=2.16%, France=1.89%, USA 3.46%, Italy=1.51%. If we loved war we would invest a lot more in the Bundeswehr. Only since the Ukraine war has there been a little more investment in the Bundeswehr.
@@bernhardstelzig3779 You forgot to mention that both Germany and Japan are forbidden from military expansion cause both countries were war-mongering out for world domination and committed the worst genocides in the world. But I do have to give credit to the new generation of Germans. They are certainly not monsters like their grand-parents and don't care much about wars. I like the younger Germans.
Government, not people. Also commenting boosts this video in the algorithm lol
Germany didn't start both wars. World War One was caused by Austria, maybe even Serbia, but not Germany.
The German Empire is the one to hold responsible for the escalation into a world war. If they hadn't invaded neutral nations like Belgium and Luxemburg the British wouldn't have been involved etc. etc.
If the Germans acted more profound the war would have been another European conflict but they overestimated their capabilities because of the staunch feeling of military superiority.
@@extantfellow46 France and Britain wasn't officially allied back then. The UK joined the war because they guaranteed Belgium independence. They had good relations to France but they had signed any treaties saying they would defend France in case of an invasion. Hadn't Germany invaded Belgium and Luxemburg the British wouldn't have joined the war.
Indeed! They think they are superior that's why they also attacked USSR despite the Non-aggression pact@@derdude6214
@@leomarreyes6011 Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Brilliant topic, thank you
You should read Iron Kingdom, by Christopher Clark. Argueably, Prussia was one of the most peaceful nations of the 19th century in Europe, as it fought in only eleven wars. Other great powers fought constantly wars all around the world. Were you to compare France or GB to Prussia, you would be astonished.
Having seen this episode and the episode on Iraq, I have to say that this channel pretends to be the all knowing, independent, academipster whatever.... you guys know what I mean... but it is poorly researched. Thats all!
Really love the way this video is put together
Thanks!
Democracy isn't an ideal. The ideal would be perfect protection of all individual rights bundled with perfect society cohesion and coordination of resources. Democracy doesn't come close to either. Democracy is just marginally better than most other forms of government, that's it.
This has provided good insight as to why, compared to other developed economies, Germany lags so far behind digitization. It's been resisted by an older, more conservative paper pushing bureaucracy.
Can you do a video on India/South Asia?
"Germany started two world wars". Uuuuh no. The first world war was started by Austria-Hungary, with German backing, yes, but still pretty unfair to say that they started two world wars.
Germany only said she would mobilize if Russia attacked. She agreed something had to be done about the assassination in Sarajevo, a question of honor and respect but never that she would participate in it. Here's the quote:
"Finally, as far as concerns Serbia, His Majesty, of course, cannot interfere in the dispute now going on between Austria-Hungary and that country, as it is a matter not within his competence. The Emperor Francis Joseph may, however, rest assured that His Majesty will faithfully stand by Austria-Hungary, as is required by the obligations of his alliance and of his ancient friendship."
Austria-Hungary only went to war against Serbia while Germany declared war against much of the world.
When I think of Germany, I think of Prussia and its history. Not some damn Austrian.
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Quit pretending that American democracy wasn't brutal or reckless
Democracy and Bureaucracy are both not an end but means of government. They must aim for the common good. Otherwise, they are useless or harmful.
The character, culture and organization of nazi germany was decidedly not Prussian. It was more Bavarian in character than anything else. The anti-intellectual sentiment of the regime was hardly bureaucratic. Part of their rise to power was emphasizing how different they were from imperial germany! This video is flashy and visually professional but the thesis is bonkers
10:30 Well in Iraq and in Afganistan, where the democracy was forced, the whole system just felt apart extreme quickly. Ű
Thanks to the mindless Americans!
'Prussia gets invaded 3 times'
When didn't Prussia get invaded? At what century?
There you have your measure of imperialist ambitions.
If anyone needs a soundbite of Kraut saying "Lol", here you go: 3:15.
Never thought THAT would happen. x)
This video is full of half truths and gross mischaracterizations. I actually believe this sort of "educational" short video format style is much worse than no "education", because it rather entertains and gives the illusion of learning something, than actually learning anything real.
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Follow the floating debris
Germany did not start ww1. The 4 pairs of boots aren't the ones to fire the first shot they just had lots of money and they were on the opposing side no good blaming the slavs no cash
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Why there are no socialist democracys???
like non-capitalist representative democracies
The DPRK is a socialist democracy, I am sure there are a few other modern examples of dictatorship of the proletariat (i.e. democracy). Maybe Iran but that's more religiously orientated, maybe you can say it's socialism but instead of class they use religious orientation.
Why Germany Loved War...for Centuries? Hummm, let's see...
British Wars, 2nd half of the 19th Century (1850-1900)
Second Anglo-Burmese War (1852) Eureka Rebellion (1854) Åland War (1854-56) Anglo-Persian War (1856-57) Second Opium War (1856-60) Indian Rebellion (1857-59) Revolt of Rajab Ali (1857-58) Kagoshima (1863) Ambela campaign (1863-64) Shimonoseki (1864) Duar War (1864-65) Fenian Rebellion in Canada (1866-71) Abyssinia (1868) Manitoba (1870) Perak (1875-76) Anglo-Zulu War (1879) Second Anglo-Afghan War (1879-80) Basutoland (1880-81)First Boer War (1880-81) Mahdist War (1881-99) Anglo-Egyptian War (1882)Saskatchewan (1885) Third Anglo-Burmese War (1885) Central Africa (1886-89) Hazara (1888) Mashonaland (1890) Hunza-Nagar Campaign (1891)Anglo-Manipur War (1891)Pahang Uprising (1891-1895) Matabeleland (1893-94) North Borneo (1894-1905) Chitral Expedition (1895) Jameson Raid South Africa (1896) Anglo-Zanzibar War (1896) Matabeleland (1896-97) Benin Expedition (1897) Siege of Malakand (1897) First Mohmand campaign (1897-98) Tirah campaign (1897-98) Six-Day War (1899) Boxer Rebellion (1898-1901) Second Boer War (1899-1902)
-------------
German Wars, Same Period
Franco-Prussian War, 1870-71
Oh, forgot the Austro-Prussian War of 1866.
And by the way, there was no German military buildup starting a European one, Wilhelm II had never fought a war in his life before 1914 and he didn't wish for, nor plan, start, perpetrate or lose that war on the battlefield, it lost the war in the dark backrooms of the Palais de Versailles where it had not been invited, absent of it's very own trial, judgement and sentencing. Prosperity can put you in deep trouble sometimes doesn't it?
Because this isn't true at all Germany never loved and it wasn't them who started ww1,it was Austria Hungary and Russia, Prussia was the one that kept being bullied by France Britain Poland the Ottomans Austria Hungary and Russia were the ones who kept going to war with Prussia (which is now Germany)
@@hamzahnurreez8420 Yes, something like that.
@@rosesprog1722 thank you,I am fed up of these narrow minded agendist alway using Germany as a scapegoat to paint a narrative their hypocrisy couldn't even be measured.
@@hamzahnurreez8420 Unfortunately, that's about all there is here on YT, people with strong opinions about things they know nothing about, YT is the official voice of the official story and anything else risks being deleted. Fortunately there are interesting sources and forums where people know how to study history, but you won't find them here. I'm here for the great variety of videos on all topics, entertainment, period. Cheers.
Bismarck: unifys germany,
spectacles: thats illegal and psychotic of you,
Just a correction. They started only the second world war,not the first.
They attacked Belgium so it counts.
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 believe what you want ;)
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 They didn't attack Belgium, they asked politely twice for the permission to walk through without damaging anything but the Belgians, having secretly been given a "blank check" by the British decided to fight the much more powerful German army (just like Poland did a few years later) under the pretext of defending her neutrality, which didn't exist anymore following her entente with the British. Therefore Germany did not attack Belgium and did not breach her neutrality either. Furthermore, when the Germans went in Luxembourg, the Belgian ambassador had not finished burning his secret files so the Germans found all the documents they needed to prove they were not guilty of the crimes they were accused of.
But to no avail, the British, the French and the Russians had decided before the war had even begun and for each their own reasons that Germany was becoming too prosperous too fast and that fair competition would not be useful in this case, therefore the British, who were in fact behind it all of this, began in the early 1900s to travel all over the world, trying to make as many secret alliances as possible. They made many but still, Germany was holding her own surprisingly well. BUT, when Wall Street, who had lent way too much money to the Brits and the French forced Wilson to break his electoral promise to stay out of the war to prevent a German victory, which would have meant total ruin for them, Continued...
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 Of course, when the Yanks came in, the fragile balance that would have probably ended the war in a truce was broken. Germany was destroyed, anger, resentment, death, starvation, poverty, depravity, strikes, unemployment, despair AND WW2 followed, caused by the greed and the stupidity of those at Versailles who said that outrageous punishment was how you prevent wars when in fact, the real intent was to eliminate an industrial and commercial competitor... they didn't think about the consequences their short sighted decisions might bring about, so they failed, were directly responsible for another war, the death and destruction of which were on a scale never seen before, again recruited the whole world and blamed and crushed Germany with such brutality this time, a nation of traditions, beauty, culture, innovation, her people, their pride and their very identity were almost eliminated from the surface of this earth, saved at the last moment by the savage expansionist aggressions of the same communist regime the Germans had tried so hard to save themselves and the rest of Europe from, a strange but heaven sent irony.
@@rosesprog1722 exactly what I wanted to say, but have no power anymore for typing that much about the facts which are easily available if one tries to search.
I think Germany name was given by Julius Caesar - it means men of war .
I could not fully find your info elsewhere.
"Germany" as an entity did not exist de facto for, let's say 1900 years AFTER Caesar's life - the fact that about EVERY neighbouring state calls them differently should tell the apt listener/reader A LOT.
In "De Bello Gasllico" he talked about the tribe of the "germanii", the "ubii" (modern northrhine-westphalia), some "suebi", a tribe called the "usipetes/usipii" and the "tencteri" tribe.
At best he chose to elaborate on ONE tribe due to particularities (especially: the unwillingness to relent and be made a roman colony...)
Caesar's "De Bello Gallico", Book 4 and 6 are interesting (in which, today ironically the Gallians have been described as "formerly more warloving and skilled at warfare than the Germanics"...).
Reducing the "modern" (1871 - today) german state to this reductionistic farce of a history video with MANY small and bigger errors is a disservice to history.
Bureaucracy. Love it or hate it
Interesting video. But you could also have explained why militarism also caused Germany's downfall in both world wars. Because yes, it did. Prussian militarism favourited aggressive foreign diplomacy and short-term war strategies. For example, the german empire couldnt build a good ally network, they never tried to defuse the austrian-serbian tensions, they attacked France and Russia without being threatened, and they thaught they could just win a war against all of Europe just with their doctrine and technology. And that's just for ww1. No need to make a list of all of Germany's diplomatic and military blunders during ww2
Bro you are so wrong russia mobilised against germany and austria so it defendet itself from russian aggression
"started two world wars" parroting that myth? Really?
We only started the second one, the first one is on Hungary... and Austria.
@@jorenvanderark3567 nope, neither! Britain, France and Russia/Soviet Union
@@bobdollaz3391 How did Britain France and the Soviet Union start ww2
this is so utterly stupid. For most of its history Germany was divided into multiple states and was victim of war for centuries- for example the 30 years war that killed half
the population. etc Germany only unified about 150 years ago.
Germany 100% collaborated with Austria to start the war, hence their monopoly Potash export ban in 1911. Then they escalated the war by entering against Russia.
Germany subjugated Poland-Lithuania and hated Poles, Jewish Poles, Slavs as a "race"
Was ist los dammit?
joining ww1 isn't starting it :3
greetings from germany xd
Austria-Hungary vs Serbia wasn't much of a world war.
love the video, hate the AI.
This video totally misses the point. The real problem is that countries like Prussia/Germany and Russia have answered incorrectly the following question: Are we a country that can win wars by letting the enemy into our homeland, or are we a country which must keep the enemy away at all costs? - England is a prime example for the latter: Every true invader (coming with force like the Romans or William the Bastard in 1066) maintained their conquests and set turning points in English history; plus England must keep its traderoutes and ports open (Another example was Carthage, which always lost, when it got invaded and/or lost its fleet). But most countries can afford letting the enemy in, losing homeground and turn the war into a home match. Germany and Russia suffered from many raids (Huns, Hungarians, Thirty Years War resp. Mongols, Tatars, Turks) but not from throne-threatening invasions, they confused and came to the wrong conclusion that they must carry the war to their enemies.
Because this is a complete lie,was wasn't inaccurate of the video saying Germany started ww1 when it was Austria,Hungary and Russia who started it.
3:11 IS THAT KRAUT!!!!!????
Kraut sent me.
welcome!
germany didn't start the first world war though, it was austria-hungary
We didnt start the first world war
True Austrians did
@@lilestojkovicii6618The empire that deadass negotiated with terrorist assassins after proving they were supported by a neighboring country, which happened to be protected by a huge empire with the biggest army on Earth and an outrageously unreasonable leadership, if they're to blame then blame has no meaning.
@@dandre3K except they werent supported by the government
Black hand was not government organisation, it had one member in it and he supported the assasins with his own money anyways
Government didnt knew anything untill it was too late
Oh and not to mention how irationally Ferdinands driver behaved that day
Oh and Government actually accepted the proposals of Austria except you know the last one that basically said we are sending our armed police across your border to investigate in your country and you should let them do it freely (basically independent state needed to give up part of its rights for the hostile empire to do "investigation" aka preparing for future invasion)
Not to mention how Austrians hated Serbia since the day Peter I took the throne because they no longer wanted to be their puppet and didnt want to be silent about systemic oppression of Serbs and other Slav nations on the teritories of the Empire
Oh and Russia was a paper tiger that lost to Japan back then like it is today
Anyways cope we won and you lost I dont have time to reason with a random brainwashed person on the Internet
@@lilestojkovicii6618or imperialism and MAD-levels of alliance building eventually being ignited ..