Active Now

Element 99
Shuhak
Zack
Discussion » Questions » Life and Society » What Was the Cause (or Causes) of World War I?
Benedict Arnold

What Was the Cause (or Causes) of World War I?

I have been reading and have some ideas, but apparently even historians are still arguing this one...

Anyway, by 1900 we were fully out of the Dark Ages with the Renaissance & Reformation, the scientific method, the germ theory of disease, the Industrial Revolution, and the Age of Reason. Physics knew everything about space, time and matter with just "a few loose ends" to tie up (hello, Albert!)

...and then suddenly, the most deadly century in the history of humankind. I read 17 million killed WWI, 28 million WWII, and still no end even now 2017.

What happened, why did the assassination 1914 of the Archduke tsunami into WWI?

Posted - March 5, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • I can only agree that historians are still arguing about that ... ditto WWII and as I understand it, (from my son's assignments many years ago.. he has an A'level in History - he went on to study *history-like* subjects but not war for his Undergrad and Masters) the causes of WW2 were complex. a number of factors, meetings, coincidences that just all came at the wrong time.. had one or more not happened maybe there wouldn't have been a war.. or maybe there would... I am not a fan of war.. I just think so strongly that in this day and age we ought to have evolved to be able to discuss and negotiate rather than turn to war :(
      March 5, 2017 1:32 PM MST
    2

  • Thank you DDBTD...and such a novel idea, to discuss and negotiate, let's give that a go!
      March 5, 2017 1:47 PM MST
    2

  • 5614
    Sin is the reason for all of mankind's woes.
      March 5, 2017 1:46 PM MST
    1

  • Thank you O-uknow, down to the basics here...
      March 5, 2017 1:48 PM MST
    0

  • 372
    When Germany gave its "blank check" to Austria, Austria refused a conciliatory offer by Serbia which, if accepted, would have resulted in, at worst, a regional conflict.

    Great Britain's Foreign Office waited until the 11th hour to declare it would abide by its treaty with Belgium to guarantee its neutrality. The German Kaiser telegraphed his royal cousin in Britain complaining that if Britain had made its intentions known regarding Belgium earlier, war could have been avoided.

    These are the two best reasons for WW1 among many, many others. In the event, Germany lost the war, suffered under the unfair terms of Versailles, and that treaty led directly to WW2. 

    This is an enormously brief review of an equally enormous question, which is far too large to be answered here. I have assumed some knowledge on your part so as not to have to go over the whole scenario - an impossibility.

    I recommend you continue to read histories of those days, but not simply from the point of view of the victors. Historians are notoriously one-sided, so read from the defeated historians also to get a balanced view.

       
      March 5, 2017 1:56 PM MST
    2

  • It's good we do have access to both sides.. I've watched many a documentary where Germans are interviewed.
      March 5, 2017 2:43 PM MST
    0

  • In a nutshell.
      March 5, 2017 4:19 PM MST
    0

  • That is fascinating Louie, and very helpful in my contemplations, ty.
    And your point of looking from the perspective of the defeated, well-taken.
      March 5, 2017 6:43 PM MST
    0

  • I can relate the initial trigger of conflict this way: think of a net, a tangle of lines and knots. Disparate European alliances had been built, broken and rather tenously tied together (marriages, trade, treaties) over the previous decades. Distrust, self-interest, political intrigue was rife in Europe. The assassination of the Archduke, heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary was like tossing a bowling ball into that net. The entangled lines of alliance were called into force, long simmering hostilities were inflamed and war erupted. The UK was outraged over the Lusitania sinking. As the demands of the war quickly intensified, more countries invoked their alliances and the net grew more lines. 
     As your own research has shown, the exact details are Byzantine and undefined. Hope this analogy helps. 
      March 5, 2017 2:03 PM MST
    3

  • 372
    The Lusitania???????????? Huh? That was well AFTER the start of the war. It had NOTHING to do with the cause of WW1.

    Nice analogy, but short on specifics.
      March 5, 2017 3:16 PM MST
    1

  • Whatever, Louie, it was the sinking of the Lusitania that drew the US into the War. Also having many of the details described in your response provided a opportunity at analogy.   This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 5, 2017 6:44 PM MST
      March 5, 2017 4:31 PM MST
    1

  • 372
    Yes, the US without a doubt. My apologies.
      March 5, 2017 6:47 PM MST
    2

  • No need. Your answer was sufficient on its own. My compliments. 
      March 5, 2017 7:55 PM MST
    0

  • Analogy very helpful, Zee, as you mention along with Louie's clear concise response.
    The 'tangle of lines and knots' would explain why I read just recently that some prescient folk were actually very concerned about the possibility of war even before the assassination.
    Previously, I had read the war caught people by surprise, and even after the assassination many thought the emotions would simmer down without war.
      March 5, 2017 6:48 PM MST
    1

  • 11101
    I think natural resources played a part - Germany had none so maybe they figured taking them from surrounding Countries was a good plan. Cheers!
      March 5, 2017 2:05 PM MST
    1

  • Thank you Nanoose, that seems to be a common motivation for war...
      March 5, 2017 6:49 PM MST
    0

  • 14795
    Very irresponsible people that had invented things that went (((( BANG & BOOM))))  that wanted to take things that diddnt belong to them.....  :(
      March 5, 2017 2:14 PM MST
    3

  • That's about it..
      March 5, 2017 2:45 PM MST
    1

  • 14795
    Thought so.....lol
      March 5, 2017 6:33 PM MST
    0

  • Thank you Jugs...our inventions more powerful than our sense of responsibility!
      March 5, 2017 6:50 PM MST
    0

  • All the above are I believe valid reasons ... But they're all political reasons and I think they leave out the human factor ... Until then we were seen as something to enjoy ... A bit of fun... Wars in the past had always been about honour and bravery, a chance to prove yourself ... You have to remember this was the first war where industrialisation allowed the equipment to be replaced quicker than the manpower ... It was like a bunch of kids who had been given rifles when they were used to playing with sling shots .. in short, they didn't really know what they were unleashing ... You only have to look at the rush to sign up ... That wouldn't have been so if they knew what was to come
      March 5, 2017 3:12 PM MST
    1

  • Ozgirl, to me those are remarkable insights...suddenly with industrialization someone can press a button for the killing power of 100 or 10,000 horsepower...and there you are at Verdun, with no way home.

    As I ponder these answers, I think about now with nuclear power we humankind have been able to restrain ourselves, so far...from obliterating ourselves.

    ty
      March 5, 2017 7:15 PM MST
    0

  • The excuse (not the reason) most often bandied about was the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand. 

    The reasons were much more complex and Louie hasn't done a bad job of summarising them.
      March 5, 2017 4:21 PM MST
    1