This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
German nationalism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I think the statement in the lead that German nationalism "claims that Germans are the ethnic, cultural, and linguistic descendants of ancient tribal Germanic people" is problematic. I doubt that all forms of German nationalism claim this. I would like to be sure that Kellas claims this to be a defining characteristic of all forms of German nationalism, and I would like to be sure that Kellas view is the fully representative so that it can be presented in the voice of wikipedia as "it claims" instead of "Kellas argues". ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 00:50, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
not that much about post WWII — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.5.184.243 ( talk) 10:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
The start of German nationalism may be a highly controversial issue whose solution depends on the definition of the word. The definition used in the first sentence of the article may be correct. But then, German nationalism did not begin in the late 18th and early 19th century but in the 15th century as is already mentioned in some parts of the article. Especially the early 16th century was the heyday of German nationalism promoted by writers like Conrad Celtis, Jakob Wimpheling, Ulrich von Hutten or Lazarus von Schwendi. -- Orthographicus ( talk) 17:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
I'd like a verification for that first sentence in the lead, since I would find it bizarre if a book actually described nationalism that way. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) ( talk) 18:57, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
I believe the first sentence needs to be "Germanic peoples" or "Germanic speaking peoples" instead of the word "German" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 40.133.241.93 ( talk) 17:48, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
What's the reason? I know a lot of Germans are severely guilted post-1945, but surely nationalism still exists? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:8B09:7E00:8027:B312:6B45:DBBD ( talk) 00:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
I have removed WP:UNDUE content introduced without WP:CONSENSUS (per WP:SILENCE, given how long the current version and emphasis has been here), and restored the previous version while incorporating some useful additions. Please discuss below before making sweeping changes to the scope of the article. L.R. Wormwood ( talk) 14:49, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
German nationalism is the nationalist idea that Germans are a nation, promotes the unity of Germans into a nation state, and emphasizes and takes pride in the national identity of Germans; the latter is problematic given the actions of Nazi Germany and ideology of the Nazism.(italicized text added) I think the first part of this addition is reasonable given the content of the article, but the second part (after the semicolon) is IMO unnecessary and somewhat recentist and/or undue for the first sentence of the article. It's discussed in appropriate detail further in the lede anyways; no need to name-drop Nazis in the first sentence.
Aggressive German nationalism is viewed as having been a key factor in causing World War I and the cause of World War II under the Nazis which sought to create a new German empire with Greater Germany at its core, and emphasized German identity and German greatness to the exclusion of all others, and sought to exterminate Jews, Gypsies, and other peoples in the Holocaust.(italicized word added) Again, not sure if this is really necessary. Do sources qualify it like this? If they do, it's good; if not, should be removed. Also, this sentence is pretty grammatically horrible; I'll fix it a bit after I finish this up.
German nationalism has faced difficulties in promoting a united German identity as well as facing opposition within Germany. The Catholic- Protestant divide in Germany at times created extreme tension and hostility between Catholic and Protestant Germans after 1871, such as in response to the policy of Kulturkampf in Prussia by German Chancellor and Prussian Prime Minister Otto von Bismarck, that sought to dismantle Catholic culture in Prussia, that provoked outrage amongst Germany's Catholics and resulted in the rise of the pro-Catholic Centre Party and the Bavarian People's Party. [1] There have been rival nationalists within Germany, particularly Bavarian nationalists who claim that the terms that Bavaria entered into Germany in 1871 were controversial and have claimed the German government has long intruded into the domestic affairs of Bavaria. [2] Outside of modern-day Germany in Austria, there are Austrian nationalists who have rejected unification of Austria with Germany on the basis of preserving Austrians' Catholic religious identity from the potential danger posed by being part of a Protestant-majority Germany. [3](entirely removed, as far as I can see) Perhaps a bit too detailed for the lede, but there's no reason I can see to entirely remove this paragraph rather than just simplify it a little. The last sentence is actually a copy of the untouched one at the end of the lede, I'd remove it if the paragraph goes back in.
German reunification was achieved in 1990 following Die Wende; an event that caused some alarm both inside and outside of Germany. Germany has emerged as a power inside Europe and in the world; its role in the European debt crisis and in the European migrant crisis have led to criticism of German authoritarian abuse of its power, especially with regard to the Greek debt crisis, and raised questions within and without Germany as to Germany's role in the world.(italicized text added) I'm probably wrong, but I don't see what some of the added text has to do with German nationalism. Sure, the debt and migrant crises are important factors as mentioned in the article, but "authoritarian abuse of its power" and "Germany's role in the world" don't quite fit with the article's topic of "German identity". Yes, I understand that it's also mentioned somewhat in the article body, but I don't think it really fits there either. Maybe it's not well explained or sourced, I don't know.
German nationalism has been generally viewed in the country as taboo [4] and people within Germany have struggled to find ways to acknowledge its past but take pride in its past and present accomplishments - the German question has never been fully resolved in this regard. A wave of national pride swept the country when it hosted the 2006 FIFA World Cup. Far-right parties that stress German national identity and pride and seek to exclude or denigrate non-Germans have existed since the end of World War II but have never governed; as of 2017 the most prominent such party was Alternative for Germany, which was founded in reaction to the Euro crisis but came to embrace taking pride in being German, repudiating German shame over the Nazi past, and anti-immigrant themes.(italicized text added) Finally, one that looks like a reasonable, uncontroversial addition to me (though I understand why some may object).
References
That last bit - "the very nature of German nationalism and identity" - is what the deleted phrase addresses. This is what every German for the last 80 years has to wrestle with - "what am I as a German? What does it mean that my people did this?"But note that nothing in the quotes directly links that with Nazism. What you're trying to say simply isn't there. It's not that Nazis and the Holocaust and all that don't belong in the lede - they certainly do, and are mentioned fairly extensively. It's the first sentence, which defines the term being discussed, where it doesn't really fit. "Neutral" does not mean "not negative"; it means "not negative and not positive". ansh 666 22:16, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: Can you quote the sentence which refers to how the German question remains unresolved? Thanks. L.R. Wormwood ( talk) 14:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
It is fairly questionable if "german nationalism" is viewed as taboo as put in the introduction. I, at the moment, cannot read the source which is used here. It might be very likely that the content in the source is misinterpreted. The Pride in being "german" is an issue, however that is some other topic than "german nationalism" with its aim to form a nation for german people.-- Joobo ( talk) 10:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
I have just removed the section "Black German nationalism" for being completely unreferenced. It was added half a year ago [1] by JaneaWilson1. Based on my limited knowledge, that material seems factual (although a lil' bit of editorializing has snuck in), so I don't have a content problem with it; but I would suggest that in such a reasonably high-profile article on a potentially contentious topic, we shouldn't add good-sized sections without a single reference. JaneaWilson1, can you speak to the sourcing for this text? -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 19:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
What where consequence that Germany start a new National list radicalist war 2402:3A80:1B50:D482:0:6A:336E:FC01 ( talk) 02:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
German nationalism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I think the statement in the lead that German nationalism "claims that Germans are the ethnic, cultural, and linguistic descendants of ancient tribal Germanic people" is problematic. I doubt that all forms of German nationalism claim this. I would like to be sure that Kellas claims this to be a defining characteristic of all forms of German nationalism, and I would like to be sure that Kellas view is the fully representative so that it can be presented in the voice of wikipedia as "it claims" instead of "Kellas argues". ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 00:50, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
not that much about post WWII — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.5.184.243 ( talk) 10:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
The start of German nationalism may be a highly controversial issue whose solution depends on the definition of the word. The definition used in the first sentence of the article may be correct. But then, German nationalism did not begin in the late 18th and early 19th century but in the 15th century as is already mentioned in some parts of the article. Especially the early 16th century was the heyday of German nationalism promoted by writers like Conrad Celtis, Jakob Wimpheling, Ulrich von Hutten or Lazarus von Schwendi. -- Orthographicus ( talk) 17:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
I'd like a verification for that first sentence in the lead, since I would find it bizarre if a book actually described nationalism that way. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) ( talk) 18:57, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
I believe the first sentence needs to be "Germanic peoples" or "Germanic speaking peoples" instead of the word "German" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 40.133.241.93 ( talk) 17:48, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
What's the reason? I know a lot of Germans are severely guilted post-1945, but surely nationalism still exists? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:8B09:7E00:8027:B312:6B45:DBBD ( talk) 00:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
I have removed WP:UNDUE content introduced without WP:CONSENSUS (per WP:SILENCE, given how long the current version and emphasis has been here), and restored the previous version while incorporating some useful additions. Please discuss below before making sweeping changes to the scope of the article. L.R. Wormwood ( talk) 14:49, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
German nationalism is the nationalist idea that Germans are a nation, promotes the unity of Germans into a nation state, and emphasizes and takes pride in the national identity of Germans; the latter is problematic given the actions of Nazi Germany and ideology of the Nazism.(italicized text added) I think the first part of this addition is reasonable given the content of the article, but the second part (after the semicolon) is IMO unnecessary and somewhat recentist and/or undue for the first sentence of the article. It's discussed in appropriate detail further in the lede anyways; no need to name-drop Nazis in the first sentence.
Aggressive German nationalism is viewed as having been a key factor in causing World War I and the cause of World War II under the Nazis which sought to create a new German empire with Greater Germany at its core, and emphasized German identity and German greatness to the exclusion of all others, and sought to exterminate Jews, Gypsies, and other peoples in the Holocaust.(italicized word added) Again, not sure if this is really necessary. Do sources qualify it like this? If they do, it's good; if not, should be removed. Also, this sentence is pretty grammatically horrible; I'll fix it a bit after I finish this up.
German nationalism has faced difficulties in promoting a united German identity as well as facing opposition within Germany. The Catholic- Protestant divide in Germany at times created extreme tension and hostility between Catholic and Protestant Germans after 1871, such as in response to the policy of Kulturkampf in Prussia by German Chancellor and Prussian Prime Minister Otto von Bismarck, that sought to dismantle Catholic culture in Prussia, that provoked outrage amongst Germany's Catholics and resulted in the rise of the pro-Catholic Centre Party and the Bavarian People's Party. [1] There have been rival nationalists within Germany, particularly Bavarian nationalists who claim that the terms that Bavaria entered into Germany in 1871 were controversial and have claimed the German government has long intruded into the domestic affairs of Bavaria. [2] Outside of modern-day Germany in Austria, there are Austrian nationalists who have rejected unification of Austria with Germany on the basis of preserving Austrians' Catholic religious identity from the potential danger posed by being part of a Protestant-majority Germany. [3](entirely removed, as far as I can see) Perhaps a bit too detailed for the lede, but there's no reason I can see to entirely remove this paragraph rather than just simplify it a little. The last sentence is actually a copy of the untouched one at the end of the lede, I'd remove it if the paragraph goes back in.
German reunification was achieved in 1990 following Die Wende; an event that caused some alarm both inside and outside of Germany. Germany has emerged as a power inside Europe and in the world; its role in the European debt crisis and in the European migrant crisis have led to criticism of German authoritarian abuse of its power, especially with regard to the Greek debt crisis, and raised questions within and without Germany as to Germany's role in the world.(italicized text added) I'm probably wrong, but I don't see what some of the added text has to do with German nationalism. Sure, the debt and migrant crises are important factors as mentioned in the article, but "authoritarian abuse of its power" and "Germany's role in the world" don't quite fit with the article's topic of "German identity". Yes, I understand that it's also mentioned somewhat in the article body, but I don't think it really fits there either. Maybe it's not well explained or sourced, I don't know.
German nationalism has been generally viewed in the country as taboo [4] and people within Germany have struggled to find ways to acknowledge its past but take pride in its past and present accomplishments - the German question has never been fully resolved in this regard. A wave of national pride swept the country when it hosted the 2006 FIFA World Cup. Far-right parties that stress German national identity and pride and seek to exclude or denigrate non-Germans have existed since the end of World War II but have never governed; as of 2017 the most prominent such party was Alternative for Germany, which was founded in reaction to the Euro crisis but came to embrace taking pride in being German, repudiating German shame over the Nazi past, and anti-immigrant themes.(italicized text added) Finally, one that looks like a reasonable, uncontroversial addition to me (though I understand why some may object).
References
That last bit - "the very nature of German nationalism and identity" - is what the deleted phrase addresses. This is what every German for the last 80 years has to wrestle with - "what am I as a German? What does it mean that my people did this?"But note that nothing in the quotes directly links that with Nazism. What you're trying to say simply isn't there. It's not that Nazis and the Holocaust and all that don't belong in the lede - they certainly do, and are mentioned fairly extensively. It's the first sentence, which defines the term being discussed, where it doesn't really fit. "Neutral" does not mean "not negative"; it means "not negative and not positive". ansh 666 22:16, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: Can you quote the sentence which refers to how the German question remains unresolved? Thanks. L.R. Wormwood ( talk) 14:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
It is fairly questionable if "german nationalism" is viewed as taboo as put in the introduction. I, at the moment, cannot read the source which is used here. It might be very likely that the content in the source is misinterpreted. The Pride in being "german" is an issue, however that is some other topic than "german nationalism" with its aim to form a nation for german people.-- Joobo ( talk) 10:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
I have just removed the section "Black German nationalism" for being completely unreferenced. It was added half a year ago [1] by JaneaWilson1. Based on my limited knowledge, that material seems factual (although a lil' bit of editorializing has snuck in), so I don't have a content problem with it; but I would suggest that in such a reasonably high-profile article on a potentially contentious topic, we shouldn't add good-sized sections without a single reference. JaneaWilson1, can you speak to the sourcing for this text? -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 19:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
What where consequence that Germany start a new National list radicalist war 2402:3A80:1B50:D482:0:6A:336E:FC01 ( talk) 02:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)