in western culture, there is an idea of "balance of power" and taking the weak as the standard. The so-called "balance of power" includes many aspects of balance, such as the balance between countries, the balance between religious and secular forces, the balance between all levels within the country (including kings, priests, nobles, citizens, farmers, etc.), and the separation of powers within the same class, etc. It has become one of the most remarkable characteristics of western civilization that one of them is not allowed to dominate, and everyone is restrained. In the international relations in the history of Europe, which country is too powerful and which country has shown a strong desire will be attacked by groups.
In the history of Europe, there have been many large-scale scuffles between national groups. From the 3-year War in Germany in the 17th century to the end of the Second World War, there were at least six or seven large-scale scuffles between five or even more than a dozen or dozens of countries. In these wars, a remarkable feature is that the strength of the two national groups is always almost equal. In other words, if one side obviously overtakes the other, There are also some wars, which are aimed at restraining a country with excessive power, such as the Spanish war of succession to the throne, the war between Napoleon and the anti-French alliance, and the Crimean war. Once the war is won, a country in the victors' group that is likely to gain the greatest benefits will be boycotted by other countries in the victors' group, which also determines that the peace conference after every major international war is complicated.
Small countries in Europe have always had strong vitality, which has a lot to do with the western idea of taking the weak as the standard. After wars, some small countries in the cracks have gained recognized neutrality, from the Netherlands and Switzerland in the 17th century to Finland and Austria after World War II. The so-called recognized "neutrality" means that if a big country dares to invade them, this big country will become a target of public criticism. The reason why Britain joined the Allies in World War I was largely because Germany invaded Belgium, a small neutral country, which directly led to Germany's defeat in World War I.
In Europe, some pocket countries, such as Luxemburg, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Andorra, etc., are still stubbornly surviving after hundreds of years, which is rare in other continents (especially China).
In contrast, China lacked this idea of balance restriction in the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period. Usually, when a country becomes the overlord, a group of tail countries will follow. In the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period, the international balance will only be the balance of power among several overlords, which is different from the balance of Europe in helping weak countries to attack strong countries.
Europe's unique geographical features, the northwest is an island country-Britain, and the east is the unfathomable Great Plains of Eastern Europe, which is occupied by a magnificent polar bear-Russia. It is the existence of these two countries that makes Europe unable to be unified.
Britain is the most active defender of the "balance of power" in the European continent, and has long played a glorious role in weeding out the strong and helping the weak, and whoever is too powerful will be attacked. Russia, on the other hand, has a vast rear area. If it loses, it can keep retreating, and it can spend several times more than its opponent to fight a war of attrition.
In the history of Europe, Spain and Sweden once played the role of hegemony, but their geographical position in a corner determined that they could not do more. Although the once powerful Austrian Empire was located in the heart of Europe, it was just a mixed body that fell apart internally, and finally fell apart after being hit. France and Germany are the only countries that really have hegemony in the center of the European continent. These two countries have indeed produced ambitious men who are interested in unifying Europe-Napoleon and Hitler, and they have indeed fought invincible in Europe. However, the same characteristics of these two bullies are that, first, the presence of Britain at sea made them helpless, and then when they launched the heaviest blow to Russia (the Soviet Union), they themselves were devastated.
since the existence of Britain and Russia makes it impossible for other countries to unify Europe, what about these two countries themselves? Britain's status as an island country determines its cultural characteristics as an island country. Although its naval power once dominated the position of no.1 in the world for a long time, its army power was only the second-rate level in Europe before the 19th century. What about Russia? To tell the truth, I think Russia is the most likely country to unify Europe if it is not because of the existence of the new American continent and the development of European history according to its own laws. Russia is very similar to the Qin State in the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period. Both of them rose from the backward "barbarian land" and embarked on the road of strengthening the country through repeated reforms. Both of them have a vast rear area, and both of them are relatively backward in economy and culture, but their military development is advanced. More crucially, Russia is not limited by the idea of "balance of power" inherent in European culture, and all it has is a territorial desire that can never be filled. In fact, both Peter I and Catherine II had made ambitious plans to annex Europe, but it was too late to implement them because of time constraints. After World War II, if it were not for the restriction of the United States from the New World, a "Qin Shihuang" would be produced from the Soviet Union, and it would be very possible to unify Europe.
There are two other points, which I think have a lot to do with Europe's failure to unify into one country:
First, the existence of the New World of America has led some of the ambitions and desires of European monarchs to take risks in the New World, thus reducing the collision among European countries themselves.
On the other hand, since the French Revolution in 1789, people's awareness of participating in politics in European countries has been continuously enhanced. After the Revolution in 1848, European countries successively established constitutional monarchy, and state power was transferred to parliament. People's intentions have a great influence on the formulation of national policies. Generally speaking, people don't have the ambition to conquer and expand like monarchs, but they are more concerned about domestic construction.
the history of China is a history of almost "one-way development" from division to unification, to the increasing degree and scope of unification, and the deepening of centralization (although there are repetitions in the middle, the general trend remains unchanged). The history of Europe, which is roughly the same area as China, is characterized by two trends of unification and separation. Sometimes the trend of unification prevails, the number of countries decreases, and sometimes the trend of separation prevails, while the number of countries increases, and the two trends persist for a long time, and no one can swallow anyone. This is a remarkable difference between the history of China and that of Europe. The "two aspects of contradiction" in materialist philosophy and China's simple concept of "long-term separation and long-term separation" can find more evidence in the evolution of European history.
Of course, the emergence and continuous development of the European Union after World War II made it possible to peacefully unify Europe. Perhaps, many years later, when the "European Federation" will appear in front of the world, at that time, the collective will of the European people will become the unity of Europe.
I think it's not because of the majestic Alps, nor because of the grandeur of the Rhine and Danube, but because of Europe's inherent idea of "balance of power" and its unique geographical characteristics.
in western culture, there is an idea of "balance of power" and taking the weak as the standard. The so-called "balance of power" includes many aspects of balance, such as the balance between countries, the balance between religious and secular forces, the balance between all levels within the country (including kings, priests, nobles, citizens, farmers, etc.), and the separation of powers within the same class, etc. It has become one of the most remarkable characteristics of western civilization that one of them is not allowed to dominate, and everyone is restrained. In the international relations in the history of Europe, which country is too powerful and which country has shown a strong desire will be attacked by groups.
In the history of Europe, there have been many large-scale scuffles between national groups. From the 3-year War in Germany in the 17th century to the end of the Second World War, there were at least six or seven large-scale scuffles between five or even more than a dozen or dozens of countries. In these wars, a remarkable feature is that the strength of the two national groups is always almost equal. In other words, if one side obviously overtakes the other, There are also some wars, which are aimed at restraining a country with excessive power, such as the Spanish war of succession to the throne, the war between Napoleon and the anti-French alliance, and the Crimean war. Once the war is won, a country in the victors' group that is likely to gain the greatest benefits will be boycotted by other countries in the victors' group, which also determines that the peace conference after every major international war is complicated.
Small countries in Europe have always had strong vitality, which has a lot to do with the western idea of taking the weak as the standard. After wars, some small countries in the cracks have gained recognized neutrality, from the Netherlands and Switzerland in the 17th century to Finland and Austria after World War II. The so-called recognized "neutrality" means that if a big country dares to invade them, this big country will become a target of public criticism. The reason why Britain joined the Allies in World War I was largely because Germany invaded Belgium, a small neutral country, which directly led to Germany's defeat in World War I.
In Europe, some pocket countries, such as Luxemburg, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Andorra, etc., are still stubbornly surviving after hundreds of years, which is rare in other continents (especially China).
In contrast, China lacked this idea of balance restriction in the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period. Usually, when a country becomes the overlord, a group of tail countries will follow. In the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period, the international balance will only be the balance of power among several overlords, which is different from the balance of Europe in helping weak countries to attack strong countries.
Europe's unique geographical features, the northwest is an island country-Britain, and the east is the unfathomable Great Plains of Eastern Europe, which is occupied by a magnificent polar bear-Russia. It is the existence of these two countries that makes Europe unable to be unified.
Britain is the most active defender of the "balance of power" in the European continent, and has long played a glorious role in weeding out the strong and helping the weak, and whoever is too powerful will be attacked. Russia, on the other hand, has a vast rear area. If it loses, it can keep retreating, and it can spend several times more than its opponent to fight a war of attrition.
In the history of Europe, Spain and Sweden once played the role of hegemony, but their geographical position in a corner determined that they could not do more. Although the once powerful Austrian Empire was located in the heart of Europe, it was just a mixed body that fell apart internally, and finally fell apart after being hit. France and Germany are the only countries that really have hegemony in the center of the European continent. These two countries have indeed produced ambitious men who are interested in unifying Europe-Napoleon and Hitler, and they have indeed fought invincible in Europe. However, the same characteristics of these two bullies are that, first, the presence of Britain at sea made them helpless, and then when they launched the heaviest blow to Russia (the Soviet Union), they themselves were devastated.
since the existence of Britain and Russia makes it impossible for other countries to unify Europe, what about these two countries themselves? Britain's status as an island country determines its cultural characteristics as an island country. Although its naval power once dominated the position of no.1 in the world for a long time, its army power was only the second-rate level in Europe before the 19th century. What about Russia? To tell the truth, I think Russia is the most likely country to unify Europe if it is not because of the existence of the new American continent and the development of European history according to its own laws. Russia is very similar to the Qin State in the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period. Both of them rose from the backward "barbarian land" and embarked on the road of strengthening the country through repeated reforms. Both of them have a vast rear area, and both of them are relatively backward in economy and culture, but their military development is advanced. More crucially, Russia is not limited by the idea of "balance of power" inherent in European culture, and all it has is a territorial desire that can never be filled. In fact, both Peter I and Catherine II had made ambitious plans to annex Europe, but it was too late to implement them because of time constraints. After World War II, if it were not for the restriction of the United States from the New World, a "Qin Shihuang" would be produced from the Soviet Union, and it would be very possible to unify Europe.
There are two other points, which I think have a lot to do with Europe's failure to unify into one country:
First, the existence of the New World of America has led some of the ambitions and desires of European monarchs to take risks in the New World, thus reducing the collision among European countries themselves.
On the other hand, since the French Revolution in 1789, people's awareness of participating in politics in European countries has been continuously enhanced. After the Revolution in 1848, European countries successively established constitutional monarchy, and state power was transferred to parliament. People's intentions have a great influence on the formulation of national policies. Generally speaking, people don't have the ambition to conquer and expand like monarchs, but they are more concerned about domestic construction.
the history of China is a history of almost "one-way development" from division to unification, to the increasing degree and scope of unification, and the deepening of centralization (although there are repetitions in the middle, the general trend remains unchanged). The history of Europe, which is roughly the same area as China, is characterized by two trends of unification and separation. Sometimes the trend of unification prevails, the number of countries decreases, and sometimes the trend of separation prevails, while the number of countries increases, and the two trends persist for a long time, and no one can swallow anyone. This is a remarkable difference between the history of China and that of Europe. The "two aspects of contradiction" in materialist philosophy and China's simple concept of "long-term separation and long-term separation" can find more evidence in the evolution of European history.
Of course, the emergence and continuous development of the European Union after World War II made it possible to peacefully unify Europe. Perhaps, many years later, when the "European Federation" will appear in front of the world, at that time, the collective will of the European people will become the unity of Europe.
I wonder if I can help you .. I found it on other websites, which is not original.