To what extent was the first decade of the 20th century the age of hope people thought it would be?

Authors Avatar

To what extent was the first decade of the 20th century the age of hope people thought it would be?

The extent, to which the first decade of the 20th century, was the age of hope people thought it would be is contingent on the perspective taken on the changes and developments that were taking place at the time. Though it was to a great extent the age of hope people thought it would be, such an extent is limited due to fact that the changes that were taking place also led to a climate of anxiety which culminated in World War one. At such a point in time, new world order was being established and the notions of “old orders” questioned. Subsequently political instability flourished and shifts in the balance of powers occurred. Advancements in technology were prevalent, ensuring an improvement on the quality of life for all. Complemented by the leaps in technology and industrialisation, economic growth was consistently on the rise, giving people high hopes of a better future, however simultaneously creating rivalries amongst nations. Hence the first decade of the 20th century was a time of great change. However it was the results of such changes which served to be catalysts for the new found tensions and rivalries amongst differing nations. As historian J.Joll asserted,   “Due to a rapid increase in economic development and imperial rivalries conflict was prominent.”

At the start of the new century the people of the world were optimistic and hopeful. A significant battle had not been fought in Europe for a prolonged period of time and as such people predicted that there would soon be world peace. However the events of history prove that this was not the case. The employment of new political ideologies such as nationalism began to disrupt the status quo, as countries demanded independence from their imperialist fathers. National groups such as the Serb and Slavic people claimed the right of national “self determination.” However, great dynastic empires such as the Hapsburg and the Ottaman were not yet ready to permit such independence to their colonial sons. This in turn evoked bitter sentiment amongst the differing national groups and turmoil brewed in areas such as the Balkans, for example, the1908 Bosnia-Herzegovina crisis. Subsequently, state controlled education was introduced and there was a wave of nationalist propaganda to sway the public opinion in order of independence for his or her country. Furthermore, national groups and countries began adopting policies of militarism, with the belief that military action was a justifiable way to advance national objectives. This in turn led to a giant “arms race” all around the world.  Such national aspirations created new sources of tension among the great powers as the various nationalist groups looked to the great nations for support. Hence one comes to see that, although no real conflict was fought in the first decade of the 20th century, the events in the Balkans served as a catalyst for the newfound tensions amongst the great nations, which ultimately led to the outbreak of the war. It is in such light that the first decade of the 20th century was in fact not the age of hope people thought it would be.

Join now!

Further contributing to political instability was the emergence of a new world order. At the turning point of the 20th century, a unified Germany emerged as the strongest power in Europe. Key to Germany’s success included her large and efficient army, her industrial strength, and her growing population, providing a large labour force. As such Germany posed as a threat to the security and balance of powers in Europe, and in particular to Britain’s navy. Neighboring great nations such as France, Britain and Russia became weary of such a threat and consequently the formation of diplomatic alliances began. In 1902 Britain ...

This is a preview of the whole essay