Germany and Italy had to face many problems in order to establish their respective unification. One of Prussia’s main concern was the fear of nearby nations such as Austria and France. These nations believed a strong united nation would affect their power of influence. As for Italy, the main concern was the Vienna peacemakers who wished for a divided Italy under the control of Austria. Both of these countries had strong influential supporters for the unification of their country. The two major supporters were, Bismarck in Germany and Cavour in Italy.
These kinds of people will influence the future of the “nation’. Otto Von Bismarck played a major role during the German unification. Otto Von Bismarck was the German “Chancellor’ (Prime minister) under the rule of William I. Bismarck was very pessimistic and opportunistic. He had many goals in which he desired to accomplish. He wanted the supremacy for his country; and was obstinate with the idea of having Germany dominate Europe and therefore wanted Austria to be excluded because of its increasing power.
It was in 1850 that Bismarck wanted to restore imperial “dignity and power’ to the King of Prussia, in which he felt as being his duty. Bismarck always intended to fight Austria, and unite German Princes under the leadership of Prussia; he used the opportunity to declare war with Austria. Bismarck fought 3 struggles, and looked to use the German’s people unitary aspirations. He had the desire to gain respect for the Prussian army and consolidate Prussia’s strength. Bismarck tried to use diplomacy instead of war if possible. He was for the German monarchy, and he detested libera lists.
... from the German confederation, because he knew that Prussia was now powerful ... Prussia with a chance to extend its interests inside the German Confederation and thus a further step towards unification. Bismarck decided to exclude Austria ... went about annexing them as part of Prussia. Bismarck used German nationalism to great effect in this ...
The only important matter for him was the greatness of Prussia. Another of his ideas was creating a Prussian empire based on the support of the Princes and not on the assent of mass. Bismarck was not open to economic issues, and feared a strong coalition or prolonged wars, which would have ruined his aims. However, his ideas about unity were more involved with Prussian expansionism than with German nationalists. Cavour was the Prime Minister of Piedmont. His role was significant as a political Leader, with a message.
He dominated the Italian political scene for 3 decades and was the main spokesmen of liberal forces. His fundamental ideas were based on liberty and progress since he was for evolution. Cavour’s formula was “free church in a free state’. He wanted a free economy in a free state. A good idea he had to gain more influence was to incorporate two of his friends in parliament, one as the minister of justice and the other, of agriculture and commerce. Cavour also believed that Austria was gaining too much power and needed to be rejected.
However, he believed that to do so, he needed a foreign help. Cavour augmented taxation and was convinced that a strong military was the key to Italy’s future. He made his army better trained and equipped. Bismarck and Cavour were great ministers yet with somehow different approaches to unification.
However, they have many points in common. Both built an army better trained and equipped because they knew that economic and military power were the foundations of an effective foreign policy. Neither ministers wanted the French as a strong foreign power, and both were against Austria because honourable arrangements could not be agreed. Defending their state, Bismarck and Cavour succeeded in the unification of their “country’.
... society. Unlike political science state centered, here the state and these non-state actors share power. Power may be defined according to ... society but the non-state actors as well. Political science power-centered is mainly about power or power politics. Under this ... discuss political science as political science state-centered and political science power-centered and to highlight the differences ...
Victor Emmanuel felt little sympathy for Cavour, “the pestiferous little man’ as he called him and Guillaume did not like Bismarck at all. He thought he was unpleasant and worrying. So both men were very habile since they were submitted to the will of their Kings. Bismarck and Cavour were both eloquent and clever. Bismarck was not a German nationalist, he was a man of Prussian state and despite the wars, he always wished to conduct peaceful politics and government as Cavour. Like Cavour, Bismarck looked for order, and setup important economic measures like social assurances.
Intentions for Italy were to form a confederation of states like the German Bund. Bismarck nationalism can be compared to Cavour’s nationalism. These two master planners could be considered as expansionists as Cavour made it possible to enlarge Piedmont Sardinian Kingdom through an unification process; and the same type of arrangements Bismarck made, taking direct military and diplomatic actions. Cavour therefore did not differ fundamentally from Bismarck. Sources: The Great Powers 1814-1914 A thor: Eric Wilmot 1992 L’allemagne 1870-1914 Edition: Masson / armand colin Bismarck Author: Henry Valloton Edition: Fa yard 1961.