Belligerence, Patriotism and Nationalism in the German Public Sphere, 1792-1815
Belligerence, Patriotism and Nationalism in the German Public Sphere, 1792-1815
复制标题
德国公共领域的好战、爱国主义和民族主义，1792-1815 年
DOI：
10.1093/ehr/cet125
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hewitson M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hewitson M
哲学家黑格尔（Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel）在1802年写道，军事冲突维护了“国家的道德健康（Völker）”，就像“风的运动”使“湖泊免于停滞”一样。黑格尔在新柏林大学的前辈约翰·戈特利布·费希特也同意他的观点。随着事件的变化，这位哲学家改变了他的历史观。他曾考虑在18世纪90年代在莱茵河左岸被吞并的领土上担任法兰西共和国的讲师。直到1796年至1797年，他才在一篇关于自然法的论文中写下了国家之间的永久和平与和谐共处，在拿破仑时期的后期作品中，他转向描绘处于冲突中的国家。就像阿米纽斯统治下的日耳曼部落一样，他们“理所当然地认为每个人都宁愿死也不愿成为半个罗马人”，今天的德国人只能希望通过复制阿米纽斯的追随者“不屈不挠的抵抗，整个现代世界都要感谢他们现在的样子”，他在1808年的《对德意志民族的讲话》中写道。费希特认为，当一个国家放弃了18世纪的典型观念，即战争是“一场机会游戏”，“赌注是暂时的得失”，而赌注的金额是事先确定的，那么这个国家就会取得胜利。“这样的思维方式即使是一时兴起也会失败。”国与国之间的战争必然没有固定的利害关系，因为军事冲突是人民保持其自由和身份以及政府的手段。费希特写道，像德国人这样的“原始民族”的“对祖国的爱”保障了“不断增长的自由程度”。这种民族主义确保了“高尚的人在战争期间快乐地牺牲自己”，与和平时期相比，其特点是“更高爱国主义的吞噬火焰”。
Military conflict, wrote the philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel in 1802, preserved ‘the moral health of nations (Völker)’, just ‘as the movement of the wind’kept ‘lakes from stagnation’. 1 Johann Gottlieb Fichte, the predecessor of Hegel at the new University of Berlin, agreed with him. In accordance with changing events, the philosopher, who had considered offering his services as a lecturer to the French republic in the annexed territories of the left bank of the Rhine in the 1790s, altered his view of history. Having written of perpetual peace and the harmonious coexistence of nations in a treatise on natural law as late as 1796–7, he turned to depictions of nations in conflict in later works dating from the Napoleonic period. Like the Germanic tribes under Arminius, who had ‘assumed as a matter of course that every man would rather die than become half a Roman’, present-day Germans could hope to bequeath ‘freedom to their children’only by replicating Arminius’s followers’‘unyielding resistance, which the whole modern world has to thank for being what it now is’, he wrote in his Reden an die deutsche Nation (Addresses to the German Nation) in 1808. 2 Nations were victorious, Fichte argued, when they renounced the idea, typical of the eighteenth century, that war was ‘a game of chance’, in which ‘the stakes are temporal loss or gain’and the amount to be staked was fixed in advance:‘such a way of thinking is defeated even by a whim.’3 Wars between nations were necessarily waged without fixed stakes, since military conflicts were the means by which peoples retained their freedom and identity, as well as their government. 4 ‘Love for the fatherland’on the part of ‘an original people’such as the Germans, wrote Fichte, safeguarded ‘an everincreasing degree of freedom’. 5 Such nationalism ensured that ‘the nobleminded man joyfully sacrifices himself’during wartime, characterised by ‘the devouring flame of higher patriotism’, in contrast to peacetime,