The Role of Alfred von Tirpitz in the Anglo- German Naval Race Essay Example for Free

The Role of Alfred von Tirpitz in the Anglo- German Naval Race Essay What role did Alfred von Tirpitz play in the Anglo-German naval race of World War I, 1890-1914? For almost a century historians have been arguing over the causes of the First World War. One of the factors regularly discussed is the Anglo-German naval race, which involved the competing construction of the British and German navies between 1897 and 1914. Much of the blame for the consequential building of navies has fallen on the shoulders of the German state secretary of the navy office, Alfred von Tirpitz. The purpose of this internal assessment is to find out what roll Tirpitz played in the Anglo-German naval race. I will research my investigation with some of the many books published about the origins of World War I, including some of Tirpitzs speeches, letters, and propaganda as well as other key figures of the naval race. The investigation will cover how Tirpitz financed the naval construction, his building strategy, and finally Tirpitzs naval laws. B Summary of evidence How Tirpitz financed the naval construction Tirpitzs entire building strategy relied heavily on his belief that he could build his great fleet without raising taxes or putting any burden on the budget.2 He planned to achieve this with an intensive propaganda campaign, supported by industry and many middle class people. Tirpitz, being an adroit politician and manipulator of men, successfully promoted the navy and created effective pressure groups, like the Flottenverein, whose views had to be taken seriously by the government.3 After a lengthy depression, German industry was looking for large investments that were continuous and predictable. To accomplish this, Tirpitz tried to establish constant yearly shipbuilding rates in order to keep factories operating at capacity. He could then argue in the Reichstag that German industry would suffer a crisis unless it got new ship orders.4 However, it was the Kaisers support that gave Tirpitz the freedom to spend a large portion of the budget on the navy.5 Tirpitzs naval building strategy Tirpitz insisted that he be able to implement a plan of steady expansion, where ships were to be built and maintained regardless of cost.6 His plan had three major components: risk theory, alliance value, and danger zone. Risk theory was the idea that the German navy would be strong enough that if Britain risked battle, Tirpitz believed, the defeat of a strong German fleet would so substantially weaken the enemy that, in spite of a victory he might have obtained, his own position in the world would no longer be secured by an adequate fleet.7 Thus, Britain would be willing to make diplomatic concessions rather than take the risk of a naval conflict. Therefore, Germany only had to build a navy in proportion to England, of about 2:3, or 5:8.8 Danger zone was the period of time when the German fleet was not yet strong enough to deter the British fleet, and might be destroyed in a preventative blow. This led Tirpitz to advise cautious diplomacy towards Britain until the fleet was ready.9 Finally, Alliance value was the notion that a strong fleet would make Germany an attractive ally for other rivals of Britain, and maybe even for the British themselves.10 Therefore, Tirpitz believed that the constant building of the navy was an important asset if Germany wanted to become a threat to Britain, and consequentially gain allies. Tirpitzs naval laws Tirpitz believed that only by building the navy by law would ensure continuous and consistent fleet building.11 In 1898 the first naval law was created, calling for the construction of nineteen battleships, eight armored cruisers, and twelve large and 30 small cruisers, all to be built within six years. Tirpitz took advantage of international situations, such as the impact of the Spanish-American War, sentiment against Britain for an incident during the Boer War, and the Boxer Rebellion in China, and introduced the second naval law in 1900. The law doubled the size of the projected navy to a total of, 38 battleships, 20 armored cruisers, and 38 light cruisers, all to be built within 20 years. This was a direct challenge to the British home fleet that had approximately 32 battleships.12 It also threatened Britain because since 1889 the British navy had been governed by a two-power standard, by which their navy had to be stronger than the combined fleets of the next two naval powers.13 The second naval law also threatened Britain because it did not set a cost limit, therefore Germany needed no new legislation to build dreadnoughts.14 Tirpitz again used international crises, like the Moroccan crisis and Britains stern response to Germany at Agadir, to pass supplementary German naval laws in 1906, 1908, and 1912.15 C Evaluation of sources Two of the sources used were: Ferguson, Niall. The Pity of War. New York: Basic Books, 1999. The English historian, Niall Ferguson, wrote this book in 1999, acquiring most of his knowledge from primary sources and other historians books. The purpose of the book is to inform readers of Fergusons argument, that the Great War was solely Englands fault, but at the same time, the book is meant to be controversial, and to sell copies. This is one of the main limitations of the book, that the author may have misconstrued some of the details in order to make England look guiltier, and thus sell more copies. In general the book is valuable because it is a secondary source written long after the actual events, so he was able to form an opinion after looking at all different types of information and viewpoints. On the other hand, it is limiting because it is not a primary source; he did not write the book during the event, therefore some of the information could be misconstrued. Terraine, John, ed. The Great War, 1914-1918. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1965. This book, written by John Terraine in 1965, gives an overview of the events leading up to and during World War One. The author argues, in the introduction, that it was the German militarism that made the war inevitable. The book is very valuable because instead of the author writing his opinion on the events, he informs readers using primary sources throughout the entire book to tell the story. This is valuable because it displays the events when they happened. On the other hand it is limited because it does not have the benefit of using historiography, and the documents could be misrepresentative. There are many photographs used that are also valuable because they capture moments in history in vivid detail, simulating a first-hand experience. However, they could be limiting because certain details could be excluded, which would affect the view of the event. D Analysis Importance of investigation in its historical context The Anglo-German naval race was a significant event that ruined any possible relationship between the two nations before the start of World War I. Although many historians, for instance Ferguson or Fay, do not attribute the naval race to causing the Great War, it is a consensus among historians that by Germany building up their navy and destroying any relationship with Britain, they were simply pushing England into an alliance with France.16 The Entente Cordial simply meant that if Germany was trying to start a war in order to gain more colonies, they had dragged another enemy into the war to fight with. The naval race also caused extreme financial difficulties for both nations, but more specifically, if Germany had given most of its naval funds to its army, it would have had a much greater chance of achieving a land victory in France.17 Analysis of the Evidence Tirpitzs acquired his fleet by using intense propaganda, and played off of international crises to acquire more money in order to implement naval laws. He had soon built a fleet that was in direct competition with Britain; however it was never clear what his objectives with the fleet were. Different historians have interpreted the intention of this fleet differently. Ferguson and Fay both argue that the fleet was intended to compete with the British navy in order to have the power over Britain to demand colonies.18 However, Scheck more so argues that the fleet was being built in order to attract any of Britains enemies as allies or even Britain as an ally. 19 It is obvious that with both opinions the navy was directed at Britain. This proves that Tirpitz was the aggressor in the Anglo-German naval race, and that he was building the navy to discourage Britain from any direct conflict, and thus would have a stronger voice that could make demands. In addition, the naval construction would attract allies, and be able to support Germany in the coming war. However, Tirpitzs plan may have contributed to various British proposals for limiting the navy, it did not intimidate them or cause them no make concessions. On the contrary, it created the atmosphere of suspicion and antagonism that would lead to a naval race.20 It is obvious that Germany was the aggressor in the naval race; however, many historians have debated over what event it was that triggered the Anglo-German naval race. Herrmann argues that it was Germanys persistent defiance of Britain over a period of time that set-off the naval race, but it was not one particular event.21 However Tucker argues that it was specifically Tirpitzs second naval law that initiated the naval race.22 The latter is a very valid point, since it was this law that put Tirpitzs fleet in direct competition with Britain. Beforehand, the British new that the Germans were beginning to put a navy together, but it did not concern them. Immediately after the passage of the law, the British began to feel pressure from Tirpitz, and responded by building their navy as well. Without Tirpitzs second naval bill, Britain would not have felt threatened, and therefore would have had no reason to enter a naval race. Tirpitz undeniably was a key player in the naval race. He pushed the propaganda, founded the Navy League, designed the naval construction strategy, drafted the naval laws, and most important, would not slow down the building process. However, historians have disputed how large a role Tirpitz played. Scheck and Tucker have put complete blame on Tirpitz, saying that he was the man manipulating the Kaiser, Reichstag and the German people, in order to support and fund his naval plan. 23 Contrary to this, Kennedy and Fay believe that Tirpitz and the Kaiser are equally to blame for the naval race.24 They argue that Tirpitz and the Kaiser were the two men who most supported the navy, and that it was the Kaisers support of Tirpitz that allowed him to get the funding and support necessary to construct his fleet. The former is a more accurate opinion since it was Tirpitz, and Tirpitz alone who designed the building strategy, and manipulated the government in order to raise funds. It was his aggressive policy that built up the German navy to the point where it posed a threat to Britain, giving them no choice but to retaliate through their own naval construction. E Conclusion Tirpitz is solely to blame for the Anglo-German naval race. As Scheck and Tucker have agreed, he was the man manipulating the Kaiser, Reichstag and the German people by using international crises to push propaganda, and implement naval bills. Tirpitzs naval strategy was directed at defeating Britain with his risk navy, in order to make available the necessary colonial property for the central European states which needed to expand.25 It was precisely Tirpitzs Second Naval Bill that competed directly with Britain, thus threatening her imperial position, forcing Britain to increase the rate of her own naval construction. If it were not for Tirpitzs aggressive naval policy, Germany and Britain would not have been thrown into a costly and dangerous naval race. It was made obvious that Tirpitz was solely to blame, when British War Minister Haldene attempted to negotiate a naval agreement, but Tirpitz made it clear he was opposed to any reductions, and negotiations failed.26 1 Peter Quennell, History Today, November 1968, 53. 2 James Joll, The Origins of the First World War (New York: Longman Group, 1984), 62. 3 Joll, 112. 4 Rafael Scheck, Alfred von Tirpitz and German Right-Wing Politics, 1914-1918 (Boston: Humanities Press, 1998), 3. 5 David Herrmann, The Arming of Europe and the Making of The First World War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 162. 6 The European Powers in the First World War: An Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. Alfred von Tirpitz, by Spencer Tucker. 7 John Terraine, ed., The Great War, 1914-1918 (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1965), 226. 8 Sidney Fay, The Origins of the World War (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1930), 235. 9 Scheck, 6. 10 Scheck, 5. 11 Jonathan Steinberg, Yesterdays Deterrent (London: Macdonald and Co., 1965), 126. 12 Tucker, 688. 13 Joll, 63. 14 Scheck, 5. 15 Tucker, 688. 16 Niall Ferguson, The Pity of War (New York: Basic Books, 1999), 70; Fay, 39. 17 Tucker, 688. 18 Ferguson, 84; Fay, 235. 19 Scheck, 5. 20 Fay, 235. 21 Herrmann, 226. 22 Tucker, 688. 23 Scheck, 8; Tucker, 688. 24 Paul Kennedy, The Rise of the Anglo-German Antagonism: 1860-1914 (New Jersey: Unwin Ltd., 1980), 224; Fay, 243. 25 Fay, 235. 26 Joll, 65

Catcher In The Rye, Compares T :: essays research papers

Throughout life, an individual may endure several emotionally or physically straining moments. In The Catcher In The Rye, Holden Caulfield suffers much verbal abuse, as well as physical. Both forms of the abuse, combined with other factors, eventually leads Holden to suffer a mental breakdown. Holden’s actions prove that ** â€Å"A blow from a whip raises a welt, but a blow from the tongue smashes bones.†   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Holden experiences several fights throughout the story. Near the beginning, he begins a struggle with Stradlater, his roommate, over his friend’s date, Jane Gallagher. Holden was upset to learn that the couple were alone in a car, knowing Stradlater’s sexual history. Holden’s mind chooses to push out the incident, so it is foggy in his head. But all he knew was, he tried to hit Stradlater but missed. After the miss, Stradlater proceeded to climb on top of Holden and take hold of his wrists, not letting him up. Stradlater dug his knees deep into Holden’s chest to keep him from moving. This seemed to go on for â€Å"around ten hours†. When Stradlater finally gave in and let Holden get up, the struggle started again, ending with a bloody nose for Holden. Afterwards, although Holden was somewhat offended by the actions, he did not seem to care about his dripping nose. He went directly over to Ackley’s room, not even stopping to wipe up his nose. He also did not seem to care about the overall fight, because he talked of it like it meant nothing to him. â€Å"I had a little goddam tiff with Stradlater,† he explains to Ackley. â€Å"Do you feel like playing a little Canasta?† This quick forgetting shows that the fight had little affect on Holden, and that his injury meant little to him.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  While Holden is in the Edmont Hotel, the elevator man mentions the prospect of a prostitute. Holden reluctantly agrees to a throw, which would cost him five dollars. Holden was very nervous during his wait, but when the girl showed up he told her he only wanted to talk. Even though they didn’t do anything, Holden paid his money, only to find that the girl was promised ten. Holden refused to pay the extra amount, assuring the girl that he was told a throw was only five and he was not going to pay more. She left, only to return minutes later with the elevator man, Maurice.

Shoe-Horn Sonata

An individual’s perception of the world is unique, conflicted by emotions and heavily influenced by their surroundings, thus giving individuals a distinct interpretation of how distinctive experiences convey meaning. The play â€Å"the Shoehorn Sonata† composed by John Misto in which he explores distinctive experiences highlighting themes and memories, evidently both characters Bridie and Sheila overcame themes of adversity, captivity, human rights and ultimately friendship through embracing their experiences.Misto’s main focus was to bring forth awareness for the nurses through distinctive experiences. John Misto cleverly instigates aspects of lack of freedom via bringing forth past experiences involved in shaping the character’s state of mind. Moreover Misto explores the theme captivity and notions of lack of human rights through Bridie’s traumatic war experiences, â€Å"Filthy pits-dug out in the open. We weren’t allowed privacy†, a basic human right stripped away by the Japanese in which Misto used the pits-dug out to symbolise lack of freedom.Furthermore Bridie’s past experiences introduced via anecdotes evoked past emotions of hatred and fear amongst the Japanese when situated near them, â€Å"Bus load of Japanese tourists†¦ surrounded me, my heart began to pound in terror†, Bridie’s past experiences manipulated her state of mind, this is evident in Bridie’s perception of harmless Japanese tourists. More so Misto’s utilisation of hyperbole, â€Å"pound in terror† while facing the audience, Bridie broke the fourth wall as a result it displayed Bridie’s fragile condition allowing the audience to sympathise for Bridie.This notion further reinforced by the incorporation of juxtaposition contrasting past experiences within the camp to her response while surrounded by harmless Japanese tourists 50 years later. Additionally, Misto’s purpose was to bring light to the lack of awareness of the nurses to ensure they received recognition for the events they’ve endured. Throughout the play Misto’s input of projections of war atrocities reinforce Bridie and Sheila’s anecdotes of pain and hardship.In addition this not only reinforces the distinctively visual that are being perceived through the dialogue but as well concrete images Misto utilises in conjunction to the abstract stories to reflect the period Bridie and Sheila was in the camp. In particular Misto’s application of symbolism in scenes 13 creates emphasis on the diaries; â€Å"those diaries were our only hope†. A piece of history that re-tell the events which occurred during WWII in the Japanese camps were burned byBritish, Misto ideally wanted this scene to be acknowledged by audience in order for them to understand Sheila’s perspective. It was apparent the British did not want the events that impacted the women’s lives to be know n, as they would be considered a shame to the empire. Furthermore it is transparent that the British’s response to burn the diaries affected Sheila’s decision to stay in Perth instead of moving back to her homeland, this notion of staying in Australia is strongly juxtaposed as Sheila is patriotic â€Å"one never stops being British. Nor does one not want to. †

Aristoles View on Drama - 1347 Words

Preamble Drama is an aspect of literature represented in performances and has been a part of the world for many decades. Drama originated in classical Greece around the fifth century B.C. The earliest performances took place in amphitheaters, which the Greeks invented to incorporate plays in their religious and civic festivals. These Greek festivals were huge theatrical events filled with three days of drama. The structure of the amphitheater allowed for an audience of thousands to observe the theatrics and watch as the actors vie to win the drama competition. In addition, ancient Greek theater used dramas to relay moral and political messages to their communities. There are two different categories of drama: comedy and tragedy. Greek†¦show more content†¦Shakespeare is said to have shaped the beginnings of modern day culture through his tragic plays by introducing man as the tragic hero rather than the Gods. Although both Miller and Shakespeare have modified the classic Greek tragedies in this manner they still fulfill Aristotle’s definition of tragedy in many ways. Aristotle Vs Othello and Death of a Salesman Shakespeare’s protagonist, Othello and Miller’s protagonist, Willy Lowman are both considered the tragic heroes in the play. Othello is a moor and a general in Venetian army. He is experienced in battle and valued by the people. Since he is this well-respected military leader, the people listened and cared about what he had to say. One instance of his high regard can be seen when one of the senators said, â€Å"Here comes Barbantio and the valiant Moor, (Act I scene 3). With Othello overcoming racist Venice and managing to gain this high status in the community, Aristotle’s first requirement for a tragic hero is fulfilled. However, many would argue that in Millers play, Willy Lowman’s character stretches the definition of a tragic hero. Since Willy Lowman was a mere salesman struggling to seize the American dream he would definitely not be considered a man of high status. Although Willy Lowman did hold one hono rable position and that was head of the household. This is illustrated during a conversation that Willy’s wife Linda has with their son Biff. Linda Says â€Å"No. You cantShow MoreRelatedEssay on Sophocles Oedipus Tyrannus1914 Words   |  8 PagesSophocles weaves a complex story that can be interpreted on many different levels of intellectual thinking. This play, since the time it was staged has been subjected to countless forms of analysis and interpretations. The most famous one being the Aristole’s interpretation of the play in his book â€Å"Poetics†, on what makes it a perfect tragedy. So, what is â€Å"Oedipus Tyrannus is really about†, that still keeps fascinating the intellectuals and readers alike. Is it the developing mystery that captivates