Topic 7.9 DBQ Practice - (open to see description)

Prompt:
Evaluate the relative significance of nationalism, imperialism, economic crisis, and political instability in causing global conflict in the period 1900 to the present.

Task Instructions:
Develop a thesis. Use all 7 documents. Include outside evidence. Explain sourcing for at least 2 documents.

Document 1

• Type of Source: Diplomatic reflection
• Author: European statesman writing after the outbreak of World War I
• Date: 1915

“No single cabinet in Europe planned in advance the whole catastrophe now consuming the continent, yet all contributed to the conditions that made disaster possible. We had created a system in which alliances were praised as protections, armaments were defended as precautions, and national pride was stirred whenever compromise appeared to yield less glory than defiance. In such a climate, a regional quarrel could not remain regional for long. Every power feared encirclement, humiliation, or strategic loss, and each believed that delay might prove more dangerous than action. The crisis in the Balkans was the spark, but the material awaiting ignition had accumulated through years of rivalry, military preparation, and political vanity. Those who search for one villain alone will miss the deeper lesson, which is that Europe armed itself intellectually and materially for general war long before the first declarations were issued.”

Historical Situation: This source reflects attempts to explain the outbreak of World War I after it had already begun.
Perspective / Limitation: The author stresses shared responsibility and structural causes, which may understate the role of particular decisions or actors.
Use in Argument: This document can be used to argue that nationalism, alliances, and militarism were major underlying causes of global conflict.

Document 2

• Type of Source: Political speech
• Author: Vladimir Lenin
• Date: 1917

 “The war has revealed not merely the ambitions of particular rulers but the whole corruption of the imperialist order. Workers and peasants are asked to slaughter one another so that ruling classes may preserve colonies, profits, and privileges. No durable peace can be expected from governments that have bound themselves to the defense of property and empire. The collapse of the old Russian regime shows that war abroad and oppression at home cannot be separated forever. When the burdens of military defeat, hunger, and misrule become unbearable, the people begin to understand that peace requires not negotiation among exhausted empires but the overthrow of those who profit from war itself. The revolution therefore arises not outside the world conflict but from its very contradictions, for imperial war has exposed the weakness of the state and opened the road to a new political order.”

Historical Situation: Lenin spoke during the Russian Revolution, linking war, imperialism, and internal collapse.
Perspective / Limitation: As a revolutionary leader, Lenin interprets conflict through Marxist ideology and may reduce complex causes to class and imperial structures.
Use in Argument: This document can be used to show how war, imperialism, and political instability combined to produce revolutionary conflict.

Document 3

• Type of Source: Economic analysis
• Author: International observer of the Great Depression
• Date: 1932

“The present crisis is not simply a matter of failing banks or declining markets; it is a crisis of confidence in the institutions that govern modern society. In country after country, unemployment has dissolved the habits of moderation upon which parliamentary systems depend. Citizens who once tolerated compromise now demand certainty, order, and immediate relief, and movements once dismissed as extremist increasingly present themselves as practical alternatives. Economic desperation has therefore become political dynamite. A society that cannot feed its workers or protect its savings is unlikely to preserve loyalty to constitutional forms for long. Unless recovery is achieved, the consequences will not remain confined to domestic unrest. Governments under pressure may turn outward, seeking distraction, resources, or prestige through expansion, while populations humiliated by hardship may welcome leaders who promise national rebirth through force. The depression thus threatens to transform economic collapse into international conflict.”

Historical Situation: The Great Depression destabilized governments and societies across the world.
Perspective / Limitation: The source strongly emphasizes economic causation and may understate ideological and diplomatic factors.
Use in Argument: This document can be used to argue that economic crisis was a highly significant cause of later global conflict.

Document 4

• Type of Source: Government statement
• Author: Japanese official defending expansion
• Date: 1931

“Our empire cannot remain secure if it leaves its economic life exposed to uncertainty, disorder, and dependence upon the decisions of foreign powers. Population increases, industrial growth, and the unstable conditions on the continent require a firm policy equal to the demands of the age. Manchuria is not merely a neighboring territory but a region essential to the maintenance of order, the protection of commerce, and the future prosperity of our people. Those who criticize decisive action speak as though nations can survive on sentiment alone. The duty of a modern state is to secure the resources and strategic conditions necessary for endurance in a competitive world. Expansion under such circumstances is not rashness but prudence. A government that fails to provide security and opportunity for its people invites weakness at home and humiliation abroad.”

Historical Situation: Japan justified its expansion into Manchuria partly in terms of economic need and strategic security.
Perspective / Limitation: The source portrays imperial expansion as defensive necessity while ignoring Chinese sovereignty and the coercive nature of empire.
Use in Argument: This document can be used to show the significance of imperial ambition and resource competition in global conflict.

Document 5

• Type of Source: Political speech
• Author: Adolf Hitler
• Date: 1937

“A nation of our strength cannot accept permanent confinement within boundaries fixed by the weakness and prejudice of others. The future belongs not to peoples content with decline, but to those prepared to secure space, resources, and unity by the force of their will. Germany was not restored merely to exist within the limits imposed after defeat. It was restored so that it might reclaim its rightful standing and guarantee the necessities of life for generations to come. Every people that intends greatness must free itself from arrangements that deny its vigor and condemn it to dependence. We do not seek conflict for its own sake, but neither can we permit our destiny to be dictated by those who fear the rise of a strong nation. History favors resolution, not hesitation, and a people that refuses bold action invites permanent inferiority.”

Historical Situation: Nazi Germany used revisionism, militarism, and expansionist ideology to justify aggressive policy in Europe.
Perspective / Limitation: The speech is propagandistic and portrays aggression as destiny and necessity while concealing the regime’s destructive ambitions.
Use in Argument: This document can be used to argue that ideology and aggressive nationalism were among the most significant causes of World War II.

Document 6

• Type of Source: Revolutionary reflection
• Author: Participant in the Mexican Revolution
• Date: 1920

“It would be a mistake to think that the violence of recent years came only from personal ambition or from the collapse of one old ruler. The deeper wound lay in a political system that had ceased to answer the needs of the people while preserving wealth, land, and authority in the hands of the few. Elections brought little trust, law offered little protection, and the countryside accumulated grievances long before the armies marched. Once the old order lost its ability to command obedience, every unresolved injustice returned at once: land hunger, regional rivalry, distrust of central authority, and anger at a state that seemed to govern without listening. Revolution was therefore not merely the product of one leader’s fall, but of a social and political crisis that had been growing beneath the surface for years until conflict became, for many, the only remaining language of change.”

Historical Situation: The Mexican Revolution emerged from long-term political crisis and social inequality.
Perspective / Limitation: The source emphasizes internal structural causes and may understate the role of individual leaders or regional variation.
Use in Argument: This document can be used to show that political crisis and inequality were also major causes of twentieth-century conflict, not only international rivalry.

Document 7

• Type of Source: Postwar reflection on science and warfare
• Author: Scientist reflecting after World War II
• Date: 1946

“The recent war has demonstrated that scientific achievement, once celebrated chiefly as a promise of progress, can no longer be separated from questions of power and destruction. Advances in chemistry, physics, aviation, communications, and industry did not of themselves create hostility among nations, yet they transformed the scale on which hostility could be organized and expressed. States now command instruments that compress distance, accelerate mobilization, and magnify destruction beyond the imagination of previous generations. The bomb, like the bomber and the radio before it, reveals that modern conflict is not only fought with ideas and grievances but with capacities produced by laboratories, factories, and technical systems. It would therefore be simplistic to say that science causes war. Yet it would be equally mistaken to ignore the extent to which modern technology enlarges the possibilities of conflict and rewards governments able to integrate knowledge, production, and force.”

Historical Situation: After World War II, observers reflected on the role of science and technology in warfare.
Perspective / Limitation: The source carefully avoids claiming technology causes war directly, which may understate how technology can reshape political choices.
Use in Argument: This document can be used to qualify an argument by showing that technology may not be the root cause of conflict, but it greatly increases its scale and intensity.