How come that Austria and Germany are two different countries?

[Rumpel]

Some one already mentioned some portrayals are romanticized. History and dramatized film and TV is often guilty of doing exactly that.

History usually is unfair

 

[yankintx]

could be ….
the film with Romy Schneider is probably flattering ….

The latest mini series on Victoria was guilty of doing the exact same thing.

One should not rely on a retelling with a disclaimer:

Based on a true story

 

[yankintx]

History usually is unfair

The problem is this generation relies on dramatized versions for there history lesson. It's not a good thing for several reasons, consider it entertainment not factual history.

 

[Chagos]

Perhaps she was not the correct choice, unable to conform.

Decidedly and her pronounced narcissism couldn't have helped much either.

 

[Rumpel]

The problem is this generation relies on dramatized versions for there history lesson. It's not a good thing for several reasons, consider it entertainment not factual history.

Erich Marischka is guilty of that.

 

[Rumpel]

i wonder whether another person in history is equally romantíized …..

 

[joluoto]

History and politics basically. Prussia united Germany, but the German speaking lands under the Habsburgs remained outside Germany for various reasons. And after WW1 when they wanted to unite the Entente powers said no. Then Hitler united them anyways, and then they were split again after WW2.

 

[HK.227]

the answer lies in the year 1866, when Prussia defeated Austria.

and founded a sort of Greater Prussia in 1871 … without Austria.

The answer also lies in Austria-Hungary being run on the old feudal system whereas Germany is a nation state.

The feudal state was an extension of the old patron-client system where people would pay for the upkeep of a protector class that safeguarded them from external threats. Over time this protector class developed into a ruling class that cared little for it's obligations and more on how much they could extract from the people, who were not considered kin to be protected but rather taxable lifestock whose only reason for existing was to make life as comfortable as possible.

With the advent of technology that allowed commoners to compete with the elite on the battelfield, people rose up and established new states based on ethnicity, which were called nation states ("nation" originally meaning group of people of similar birth, like for instance "the nation of Israel" as mentioned in the Bible). These states were created for the benefit of the people rather than a ruling elite and had laws guaranteeing the rights of their citizens (the US Constitution being one such document). Nation states thus had a major advantage in the morale and engagement of their people in state matters as compared to those of feudal states, which played a large part in Germany kicking major butt and eventually unifying.

Regrettably, when a state exists only to safeguard it's own people, it will often go down the path of demonizing other people and depriving them of their rights for it's own benefit. Thus nationalism has earned a bad reputation for what it's adherents have done to the people of other nations, whereas originally it was a major landmark in the progress of human rights.

Equally regrettable, over time countries slowly slide back into various forms of neo-feudalism where the interests and rights of the citizens are secondary to those of the ruling elites. This tending to be the predictable outcome when people don't make an example of the worst politicians from time to time. (Just saying.)