Friedrich Ratzel: German Geographer and Ethnographer

 
Friedrick
 
Ratzel
 
Introduction:
Friedrick 
Ratzel 
(August 
30, 1844 – August 9, 1904) 
was 
a 
geographer  
and
 
notable 
for 
coining 
the 
term 
Lebensraum—"living 
space." 
His 
initial  
insight
was 
that 
a social 
group 
of 
human beings 
in 
many 
ways 
functions similarly 
to 
an  
individual,
organic 
organism, 
namely seeking 
the 
necessities 
for 
life 
and sufficient 
space 
in  
which 
to find
or 
produce them—Lebensraum. However, 
this 
concept 
became 
problematic  
when 
focused
specifically 
on 
the 
needs 
of 
German 
people, 
without 
regard 
for 
others or  
humankind 
as 
a
whole. This 
self- 
centered 
viewpoint 
provided 
justification 
for 
the 
expansio 
n  of Germany 
and
the 
subsequent 
suffering 
those 
in 
other 
nations, 
as 
well 
as 
support 
for 
social  
Darwinist
rationalization 
for 
 and 
 
policies 
generally.
racistimperialistethnographer,German 
 
Life:
Friedrich 
Ratzel 
was
 
born 
on 
August 30, 1844 
into
 
an
 
important 
family 
in
Karlsruhe, 
His 
father 
was 
the 
head 
of 
the 
household 
staff 
of 
the 
Grand 
Duke 
of
Baden, 
a position 
highly 
regarded at 
the 
time. 
Friedrich 
attended 
in 
Karlsruhe 
for
six 
years before 
being 
apprenticed 
at 
age 
15 
to 
an
 
apothecary.
school high Germany. 
In 
1863 
Ratzel went 
to 
Rapperswil 
on 
the 
Lake 
of 
Zurich, 
, 
where 
he
began 
to 
study 
the 
classics. 
After 
an 
additional 
year 
as an 
apothecary 
at 
Mörs 
near 
Krefeld 
in
the 
Ruhr 
area 
(1865-1866), 
he 
spent 
a short 
time 
at 
the 
high 
school 
in 
Karlsruhe and 
later
became 
a 
student 
of 
at 
the 
universities 
of 
Heidelberg, Jena, 
and 
He 
received
his 
Ph.D. 
in 
1868, 
and 
the 
following 
year 
published 
his 
first 
work—Sein 
und 
Werden der
organischen Welt, 
a 
commentary 
on 
 
and 
his
 
ideas.
DarwinCharles Berlin. zoologySwitzerland
 
After 
the 
completion 
of 
his 
schooling, 
Ratzel 
started 
to 
travel, 
an 
experience 
that
transformed him from 
a 
zoologist/biologist 
to 
geographer. 
He 
began 
fieldwork 
in  
the
 writing 
letters 
about 
his 
experiences. 
These 
letters 
led 
to 
a 
job 
as 
a  
traveling
reporter 
for 
the 
Kölnishe Zeitung 
 
which 
provided 
him the means 
for  
further
 
travel.
newspaper,Mediterranean,
 
 
His 
career 
was 
interrupted 
by 
the 
of 
1870-1871. Ratzel 
joined
the 
army, 
and 
traveled 
through 
and 
over 
the 
Carpathians, 
where 
he 
saw 
villages 
with
German 
people 
living in 
a 
foreign 
land. 
This experience 
stimulated 
his 
interest 
in 
human
geography 
and 
influenced 
his 
later  
work. 
After 
the 
war, 
Ratzel 
embarked 
on 
several
expeditions, 
the 
lengthiest 
and 
most 
important 
being
 
his 
1874-1875
 
trip 
to
 
North 
 
America,
 
and 
 
He 
studied 
the influence 
of 
people 
of 
German 
origin 
in  
the 
especially 
in 
the 
Midwest, 
as 
well 
as 
other 
ethnic 
groups 
in 
North
 
America.
States,United Mexico.Cuba,Hungary War Franco-Prussian 
He 
produced 
a 
written 
work 
of 
his 
account 
in 
1876, 
Stadte- 
ünd 
Culturbilder 
aus
Nordamerika, 
which 
would 
help 
establish 
the 
field 
of 
cultural 
geography. According 
to  
Ratzel
are the 
best 
places 
to 
study 
people because life 
is 
"blended, 
compressed, 
and
accelerated" 
in 
cities, 
and 
they 
bring 
out 
the "greatest, 
best, 
most 
typical 
aspects 
of 
people."
Ratzel 
had 
traveled 
to 
cities 
such 
as 
 
 
,  
New
Orleans, and 
San 
Francisco 
to 
conduct 
his
 
research.
D.C.Washington, Philadelphia,Boston,York, New cities ,
 
Upon 
his 
return 
in 
1875, 
Ratzel 
became a 
lecturer 
in 
geography 
at 
the 
Technical 
High
School 
in 
 
In 
1876 he 
was 
promoted 
to 
assistant 
professor, 
which 
rose 
to 
a 
full
professorship 
in 
1880. 
While at 
Munich, 
Ratzel 
produced 
several 
books 
and established 
his
career 
as 
an 
academic. 
In 
1886, 
he 
accepted 
an 
appointment 
at 
the 
University 
of 
Leipzig. 
His
lectures 
were 
widely 
attended, notably 
by 
the 
influential American 
geographer 
Ellen  
Churchill
Semple.
Munich.
Ratzel 
produced 
the 
foundations 
of 
human geography 
in 
his 
three-  
volume
Anthropogeographie 
from 1882 
to 
1891. 
This work 
was 
misinterpreted 
by 
many 
of  
his
students, 
creating a 
number 
of 
environmental determinists. 
He 
published 
his 
work 
on  
political
geography, 
Politische Geography, 
in 
1897. 
It 
was in 
this 
work 
that 
Ratzel 
introduced  
concepts
that 
contributed 
to 
Lebensraum and 
later 
to 
social
 
Darwinism.
Ratzel 
continued 
his 
work 
at 
Leipzig until his 
sudden 
death 
on 
August 9, 1904, 
while
on 
holiday 
with 
his wife 
and 
daughters 
in 
Ammerland,
 
Germany.
 
Ratzel 
Contribution 
and
 
Achievements:
 
Influenced 
by 
thinkers 
like 
and 
Ernst 
Heinrich 
Haeckel,
Ratzel wrote 
on 
a variety 
of 
topics, 
ranging from zoology 
and 
to 
geography, 
cultural
geography, 
and 
geostrategy. 
His 
famous 
essay Lebensraum 
(1901), for 
example, 
dealt 
with  
the
topic 
of 
biogeography. 
Through 
his 
writings, Ratzel 
created 
a foundation 
for 
the 
uniquely
German 
variant 
of
 
—geopolitik.
geopoliticsbiology zoologist Darwin Charles 
Ratzel’s 
key 
contribution 
to 
geopolitik 
was 
the 
application 
of 
the 
biological 
concept
of 
growth 
and development 
to
 
geography. 
Until 
then, 
states with 
their 
borders 
were
considered 
static, 
bound 
to 
a certain 
geographic 
location. 
States, 
however, 
according 
to  
Ratzel,
are 
organic 
and 
growing, 
with 
borders 
representing 
only 
a temporary 
halt 
in 
their  movement.
Just 
like 
a 
biological organism 
grows 
and 
develops, 
it is 
not natural 
for 
states 
to  
be 
static. 
The
expanse 
of a 
state’s 
borders 
is 
a 
reflection 
of 
the 
health 
of 
the
 
nation.
Ratzel’s 
idea 
of 
Raum 
(space) 
grew 
from 
his 
organic state 
conception. 
His 
early
concept 
of 
Lebensraum 
did 
not 
consider 
political 
or 
economic expansion, but rather 
spiritual
and 
racial nationalist expansion. 
He 
regarded 
the 
Raum- 
motiv 
as 
a 
historical 
driving 
force,
pushing 
peoples 
with 
great 
Kultur 
to
 
naturally 
expand. Space, 
for 
Ratzel, 
was 
a
 
vague
 
concept, theoretically 
unbounded 
just 
as 
was 
Hitler
’s 
later. 
Raum 
was 
defined 
by  
where
German 
people 
live, where 
other weaker 
states 
could 
serve 
to 
support German people
economically, 
and where 
German 
culture 
could 
fertilize 
other 
cultures. However, 
it 
ought 
to
be 
noted 
that Ratzel 
did 
not 
use 
his 
concept 
of 
Raum 
in 
an 
aggressive 
manner, 
but 
he 
simply
theorized 
about 
the 
natural expansion 
of 
strong 
states 
into 
areas 
controlled 
by 
weaker
 
states.
Ratzel’s 
writings coincided 
with  
the 
development 
of 
the 
Second 
Industrial
Revolution, 
after 
the 
Franco-Prussian 
War
, 
and 
the 
subsequent 
search 
for 
markets,  
that
brought 
Germany 
into 
competition with 
England.
 
Influenced 
by 
the 
American 
geostrategist,
Alfred Thayer 
Mahan, 
Ratzel 
wrote 
of 
aspirations 
for 
German 
naval 
reach, arguing 
that sea
power, unlike land 
power, 
was 
self-sustaining, 
as 
the 
profit 
from international 
trade 
would  
pay
for 
the 
merchant 
marines.
 
Ratzel's 
writings were 
widely 
welcomed, 
especially 
as 
a
justification 
for German 
imperial
 
expansion.
 
L
e
ga
c
y
:
 
Ratzel's writings, 
especially 
his 
concept 
of 
Lebensraum, 
were 
used 
in 
the  
development
of 
Social 
Darwinism. 
Ratzel 
influenced 
numerous scholars 
in 
the area 
of  
geopolitics. 
German
geostrategist, 
Karl 
Haushofer,
 integrated 
Ratzel’s 
ideas 
on 
the 
division  
between 
sea 
and 
land
powers 
into 
his 
own 
theories, 
adopting 
the view 
that 
borders 
are
 
largely
 
insignificant, 
especially 
as 
the 
nation 
ought 
to 
be 
in 
a 
frequent 
state 
of 
struggle with 
those
around
 
it.
Rudolf 
Kjellén 
was 
a 
famous 
Swedish 
student 
of 
Ratzel's, 
who further 
elaborated on
his 
"organic 
state theory" and 
who 
coined 
the 
term 
“geopolitics.” 
Kjellen’s 
interpretation 
of
Ratzel 
was
 
very 
popular 
among 
Nazis, 
and 
was
 
used as 
a justification 
for 
German
expansionistic 
politics leading 
to 
World 
War
 
II
.
 
Q
u
o
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
:
 
"A 
philosophy 
of 
the 
history 
of 
the 
human race, 
worthy 
of 
its 
name, 
must 
begin 
with 
the
heavens 
and 
descend 
to 
the 
earth, 
must 
be 
charged 
with 
the 
conviction 
that all 
existence 
is
one—a 
single 
conception 
sustained 
from 
beginning 
to 
end 
upon one 
identical
 
law."
 
"Culture 
grows 
in 
places 
that 
can 
adequately 
support dense 
labor
 
populations."
Ratzel 
Main 
Geographic 
Works:
Anthropogeographie:
In 
Anthropogeographie 
(vol. 1, 1882, 
and 
vol. 
2, 1891) 
he 
considered population
distribution, 
its 
relation 
to 
migration and 
environment, 
and 
also 
the 
effects 
of 
environment 
on
individuals 
and societies. 
His 
other 
works 
included 
Die 
Erde 
und 
das Leben: 
Eine  
vergleichende
Erdkunde(1901–02|); 
“Earth 
and 
Life:
 
A.
Although 
Ratzel’s 
ideas 
certainly 
had 
an 
effect 
in 
the 
period 
after 
world 
war 
I,
subjectively 
he 
still 
belonged 
to 
Europe’s 
pre-1914 
era. 
This 
is 
apparent, 
for 
example, 
from
his 
insistence 
that spatial growth 
of 
the 
state 
need 
not 
necessarily resemble 
that 
of 
other
aggregate-organisms 
and 
take the 
form 
of 
an 
amorphous 
extrusion 
beyond 
existing
boundaries 
into
 
immediately adjacent 
areas. 
Rather, 
he 
believed 
that the 
expansion 
of
advanced 
states 
could 
be a rational 
and 
planned affair, 
accomplished 
through 
the 
selective
sending 
out 
of 
groups 
of 
excess 
population 
for 
the 
purposes 
of 
colonization 
(1899-1912: 
I,
147-48, 
167-68). 
The 
territorial 
needs 
of 
these 
groups 
could 
be 
met 
through 
land 
acquisition
overseas, 
in 
the 
non-European 
world 
(1899-1912: 
I, 
167-68). 
As 
noted, 
Ratzel 
rejected 
the
idea 
of 
territorial 
expansion 
on 
the 
European continent 
itself. 
Moreover, 
although 
he
 
did
 
adopt 
the 
view 
of 
relations 
between states 
as 
a 
struggle for 
space, 
which 
meant 
existence, 
it
may 
well 
be 
argued 
that 
he 
did 
not 
necessarily 
feel 
that the 
ultimate 
outcome 
of 
this 
would 
be
a general 
armed conflagration. 
Despite 
a 
not 
infrequently 
aggressive 
tone, 
in 
important
respects 
his 
thinking 
unmistakably reflected 
some 
of 
the 
dominant 
optimism 
of 
nineteenth-
century
 
liberalism.
This 
was 
an 
ambiguity that 
Ratzel 
shared 
fully 
with 
social 
darwinism 
in 
general, 
and
in 
his 
writings 
as 
well can 
be 
found 
the 
vision 
of 
the 
progressive 
march 
of 
civilization 
toward
ultimate 
perfection. 
One 
example 
of 
this 
was  
his 
optimistic 
conviction 
that 
the 
petty
squabbles 
between 
the 
nations 
of 
Europe
 
would 
be 
irresistibly 
overcome 
by 
the 
further
development 
of 
international 
commerce 
and transportation 
(1898: 
144-45; 
1899-1912: 
I, 
242;
1901-1902: 
II, 
676). 
In 
this 
spirit, 
he 
may 
well 
have 
ultimately allowed for 
the 
possibility 
of 
a
peaceful 
and 
mutually 
satisfactory 
solution 
of 
the 
existing space- 
need 
through international
negotiation and 
moderation. 
The 
outbreak 
of 
world 
war 
I 
dashed 
forever the 
hope
 
that
developments 
might 
in 
fact 
follow 
such 
a 
course, 
and 
Germany’s 
situation 
after 
1918 
led  
rather
to 
an 
intensification 
of 
the 
ideas 
we 
have 
been
 
discussing.
The 
overseas colonies were 
lost 
with 
no 
prospect 
of 
reacquisition, 
but 
even 
more
damaging 
was 
the 
loss 
of 
territories 
in Europe
 
itself 
that the 
Germans 
considered 
to 
be
rightfully 
theirs. 
The 
atmosphere 
of 
the 
1920s 
was 
consequently 
marked 
by 
a 
sense 
of 
mass
claustrophobia 
and 
obsession 
with 
Germany’s 
space-need, 
an 
obsession 
well demonstrated 
by
the 
remarkable 
popularity 
of 
works 
such 
as 
Hans 
Grimm’s 
Volk 
ohne 
Raum 
(A 
people
without 
space) 
(Grimm, 
1927; 
Smith, 1983), 
or by 
the 
flourishing 
of 
the 
new 
science 
of
Geopolitik. 
In 
such 
an 
atmosphere, 
Ratzel’s 
postulates 
about 
Lebensraum 
seemed 
to 
take 
on 
a
new 
relevance 
and 
urgency (Lange, 
1965: 432-33), 
and 
his 
Political 
geography 
appeared 
in  
its
third and definitive 
edition 
in 
1923. 
The 
value 
of 
his 
arguments 
remained 
the fact that 
they
seemed 
to 
offer 
a 
scientific 
basis and 
justification 
for 
these
 
concerns.
 
FIG: 
ANTROPO 
GEOGRAPHIE 
BY
 
RATZEL
 
Polistiche
 
Geographie:
 
For 
Ratzel, the 
cultural 
development 
of 
a 
state 
was 
inseparable 
from 
its 
spatial 
growth.
Consequently, 
states 
of 
limited 
territorial extent, 
such 
as tribal groupings 
in 
Africa, 
were
associated 
with 
lower 
levels 
of 
development. This 
condition 
Ratzel 
termed 
K 
leinraum 
(1899-
1912:1, 
236-38, 
241; 
1923: 
152-53). 
The 
advance 
of 
civilization 
was 
marked 
everywhere 
by
the 
progressive broadening 
of 
the 
territorial 
base 
of 
the
 
state.
In 
considering 
the 
present 
and 
the 
future, 
Ratzel 
declared 
repeatedly 
that 
the 
territorial
base 
of 
the 
European 
states 
had 
become 
too 
narrow, 
and would 
in 
the 
future 
have 
to 
give 
way
to 
the 
modern 
principle 
of 
Grossraum. 
Concerning 
precisely 
what 
was  
meant 
by 
the
designation 
gross, 
or 
large, 
Ratzel 
remained 
vague, 
but judging 
from 
his 
usage 
it 
implied 
a
state 
with 
physical dimensions 
greater 
than 
those 
normal 
or 
indeed 
possible 
on 
the 
European
continent. 
Ratzel 
did 
not 
coin 
this 
term, 
which 
had 
already 
been 
used 
in 
the 
German
 
literature
 
on 
political 
economy 
some 
three 
decades 
earlier 
(von 
Inama-Sternegg, 
1869: 
9ff; 
Faber,
1982: 
392), but 
within 
his 
system 
it 
acquired 
a 
new 
significance. 
His 
models 
came 
from 
the
non-European 
world, 
most notably from the impressive 
example 
of 
the 
rapid and 
vibrant
colonization 
of 
the 
United 
States, but 
included 
Australia, 
Russia, 
and China 
as 
well 
(1905:
476; 
1923: 
264, 
270). 
These 
countries, 
he 
insisted, exemplified 
the 
pattern 
that 
was to 
be 
the
wave 
of 
the 
future: politically unified 
states 
based 
on 
continental 
or 
at 
least 
sub 
continental
land 
masses 
(Faber, 
1982: 
392). 
Ratzel 
expressed an 
understandable 
consternation 
at 
the fact
that 
it 
was 
indeed 
the 
’young’ 
non- 
European powers which 
seemed 
to
 
have 
the 
spatial
advantage, 
but 
most 
fundamentally 
his 
urging 
of 
the 
Grossraum 
principle 
was 
intended, 
as
was 
his 
entire 
theory, 
to 
awaken 
Germany 
to 
the 
enormity 
of 
the 
stakes 
in 
the 
current 
struggle
for 
colonial
 
acquisitions.
It 
is 
entirely logical 
that 
in 
Ratzel’s 
theory 
of 
the 
state 
and 
political expansion 
the idea
of 
the 
people 
as 
a 
nation 
or 
Volk 
was 
accorded 
only 
a 
minor 
significance. 
The 
state 
for 
him
was 
an 
organic whole 
that 
developed 
out 
of 
the 
interaction 
between 
a 
group 
of 
people 
and 
the
territory 
they occupy 
- 
ein 
Stuck 
Boden 
und 
ein 
Stück Menschheit, 
in 
his famous 
formulation
(1923: 
2). 
It 
is 
precisely 
this 
shared relationship 
to 
the 
land 
that 
waa 
wnportant 
in 
bonding 
the
group 
together, 
and 
not 
an 
a 
priori 
ethnic 
or 
racial 
kinship. 
He 
made 
this 
point 
explicitly 
in
defining the 
Volk 
as 
’a 
politically 
united 
body 
made 
up 
of 
groups 
and 
individuals, 
who 
need
neither 
to 
be 
related 
ethnically nor 
linguistically, 
but 
who 
through 
their 
common 
territory 
are
spatially linked 
together (verbundene)’ 
(1923: 
3, 
emphasis 
added). 
Ratzel 
did 
not 
deny 
the
existence 
of 
ethnicity 
as 
such, 
and 
even 
allowed 
that 
the 
circumstance 
of 
ethnic kinship 
had
historically 
been 
one 
factor, 
among 
many, 
for 
fostering 
cohesion and 
unity within a 
state
(1923: 
141). 
He 
left 
no 
doubt, 
however, that 
in 
the 
Europe 
of 
his 
day 
it was 
unacceptable 
to
continue 
to 
view 
ethnic 
or 
national 
affinity 
as 
the 
ultimate 
basis for 
the 
formation 
of 
the
 
state.
To 
the 
national 
principle 
outlined 
earlier 
in this 
essay, 
Ratzel 
emphatically 
contrasted
his 
own 
geographical 
or 
territorial 
principle, and 
insisted 
that 
in 
the 
modern 
world 
the 
basis
for 
a 
successful 
state 
must 
be 
the 
idea 
of 
Grossraum. 
Accordingly, 
he 
condemned 
the 
striving
for 
an 
exclusively 
nationally founded state, 
or 
Nationalitdtenpolitik, 
which 
represented 
a
dreamy goal 
for 
many 
of 
his 
contemporaries 
in 
central 
and Eastern Europe: 
Ratzel 
applied
this 
logic 
with 
admirable consistency 
to 
the 
situation 
in 
his 
own 
country. 
In 
an 
early 
essay,  
for
example, 
he 
rejected 
on 
principle 
the 
claims 
of 
the 
Germans 
in 
the 
Baltic regions 
to
membership 
in 
a German 
state, 
arguing 
that 
this 
would 
violate 
the 
exclusively 
geographical
or territorial 
logic 
which 
must 
be 
the 
foundation 
of 
all 
political 
unions 
(1878: 
198). 
He
 
firmly
 
adhered 
to 
this position 
in 
his 
later 
work. 
In 
so 
doing, 
he 
not 
only 
opposed 
a popular 
current  
of
the 
time, 
but 
indeed 
raised 
fundamental 
questions 
at 
the 
outset 
about 
an 
issue 
that was 
to
become 
nothing 
less 
than 
a 
holy 
cause 
for 
many 
of 
his 
countrymen. 
Within 
the 
context 
of 
the
tensions 
between 
nation and 
empire discussed 
earlier 
in
 
this 
essay, the 
significance 
of  
Ratzel’s
political geography 
is
 
unmistakable.
He 
has 
discarded 
as 
’retrograde’ 
the 
classic 
nineteenth-century 
idea 
of 
the 
nation  
state
as 
the ultimate form 
of 
political 
organization, and 
offered 
in 
its stead something  
radically
different. Presented 
in 
the 
language 
of 
the 
age, using, 
that 
is, 
the 
’scientific’ precepts  
of a
rudely materialist 
social darwinism, 
his 
system was 
a 
coherent formulation 
and  justification
of 
the 
concern 
that 
animated 
Europe’s 
modern 
age 
of 
imperialism: 
the 
drive 
for  
political
expansion. 
Its 
inordinate 
significance 
lay 
in 
the fact 
that 
it 
replaced 
an 
essentially  restricted
ideal 
of 
political 
organization - 
limited 
spatially 
to 
the 
distribution 
of 
the 
nationality  
and 
its
national 
territory, 
and bound at 
least 
in 
theory 
by 
notions 
of 
international coexistence -  
with 
a
vision 
of 
biologically 
founded 
expansion 
having 
no 
ultimate 
goal besides 
that 
of  
further
growth 
and
 
expansion.
 
In 
an 
early 
discussion 
of 
Ratzel, 
Franz 
Neumann 
identified 
this fundamental aspect 
of
his 
thinking 
and expressed 
it 
succinctly 
with 
the 
observation 
that 
’The 
laws 
of 
movement 
...
and 
space 
cannot 
be reconciled 
with 
the notion 
of 
a 
unified 
legal 
and 
political 
sovereignty
over 
a specific area’ 
(1944: 139). 
O 
lder 
standards 
of 
relations 
between 
states 
were 
overruled
by 
the 
single 
exigency 
of 
the 
struggle 
for 
space, 
and success 
in 
the 
endeavour 
to 
expand
became 
the 
sole 
criterion 
for 
moral
 
judgement.
 
FIG: 
POLITISCHE 
GEOGRAPHIE 
BY
 
RATZEL
 
Unity 
in
 
diversity:
 
Unity 
in 
diversity 
is 
a 
concept 
of 
"unity 
without 
uniformity and 
diversity 
without
fragmentation"
[1] 
that 
shifts focus 
from unity 
based 
on 
a 
mere 
tolerance 
of 
physical, cultural,
linguistic, social, 
religious, 
political, ideological 
and/or 
psychological 
differences 
towards 
a
more 
complex 
unity 
based 
on 
an 
understanding 
that 
difference 
enriches human 
interactions. It
h
a
s
 
a
p
p
li
c
a
t
i
o
ns
 
i
n
 
m
a
ny
 
f
i
e
l
d
s
,
including 
ecology,
 
cosmology,
 
philosophy
 
religion
 
and
 
politics.
The 
idea 
and 
related 
phrase 
is 
very 
old 
and 
dates 
back 
to 
ancient 
times 
in 
both  
Western
and Eastern 
Old 
World 
cultures. 
The 
concept 
of 
unity 
in 
diversity 
was 
used 
by 
both  
the
indigenous 
peoples 
of 
North 
America 
and 
Taoist 
societies 
in 
400–500 
B.C. 
In 
premodern
Western 
culture, 
it 
has 
existed 
in 
an 
implicit 
form 
in 
certain 
organic 
conceptions 
of 
the
universe 
that 
developed 
in 
the 
civilizations 
of 
ancient 
Greece
and
 
Rome.
"Unity 
in 
diversity" 
is 
used 
as 
a 
popular 
slogan 
or 
motto 
by 
a 
variety 
of 
religious and
political 
groups as 
an 
expression 
of 
harmony and 
unity 
between dissimilar 
individuals 
or
groups. 
The 
phrase 
is 
a 
deliberate 
oxymoron,
 
the 
rhetorical
 
combination 
of 
two  
antonyms,
unitas 
"unity, 
oneness" 
and 
varietas "variety, 
variousness". 
When 
used 
in  
a  
political context, 
it
is 
often used 
to advocate 
federalism
 
and
 
multiculturalism.
 
Personal view 
of
 
ratzel:
Geography 
is 
the 
best 
subject 
to 
be 
part 
of, because 
it 
allows 
me 
- 
if 
I 
wish 
- 
to  
explore
anything 
or everything 
that 
happens 
on 
or 
near 
the 
surface 
of 
the Earth. 
That 
should  
be
enough 
to 
keep anyone happy, 
however 
broad 
their 
interests. 
In 
this 
Dep 
artment 
alone,
students 
and staff 
can 
engage 
in 
a 
very 
broad 
spectrum 
of 
subjects, 
from 
glaciology 
to 
the
oceanography, 
from 
the 
biosphere 
to 
the 
constantly 
changing 
atmosphere, 
from 
air 
pollution
to 
human 
health, 
and 
from 
social 
inequalities 
to 
the 
views 
of 
one 
Earth 
offered 
by 
the 
latest
satellite 
and 
GIS 
technologies. 
When 
we 
also 
consider 
our 
close 
partners 
in 
Geoscience, 
that
scope 
widens yet 
further, 
to
 
include 
mountain 
building, volcanoes, 
the 
slow 
motion 
of
continents, 
the 
landscapes 
of 
the 
ancient 
earth. 
In 
St 
Andrews, 
as 
in 
many 
other 
Universities,
the 
boundaries 
between 
geography 
and 
geoscience/geology 
are 
not 
clear 
and 
sharp. 
They
grade 
seamlessly 
into 
one another, 
just 
as geography 
grades 
into 
many 
other 
disciplines, 
such
as meteorology, 
sociology, archaeology, 
history, 
epidemiology, 
rock 
mechanics, 
physics,
 
and
 
so 
on. Geography 
shares 
with 
these 
adjacent subjects 
many 
of 
their  
methodologies,
techniques, 
and philosophies’, 
adding 
yet 
further 
to 
the 
diversity 
of 
geography 
as 
it is
practiced
 
today.
Geography 
is 
certainly diverse. 
Diverse 
in 
its 
subject 
matter 
and 
its 
methods, 
diverse  
in
its 
aims, diverse 
it 
its 
language. 
So 
much so that 
one 
has 
to 
be expert 
in 
several 
sub-  
dialects 
of
English 
to hope to 
converse 
with 
all 
of 
the 
staff 
members in 
this 
building. 
The  
diversity 
of
geography 
is 
not 
in 
question. 
But 
is 
it
 
unified?
Many answers 
have 
been 
suggested, and 
many 
definitions 
of 
geography 
have 
been
offered. 
Perhaps 
no 
definition 
will 
ever 
satisfy all 
geographers, 
nor 
encompass 
all 
of 
the
things 
that 
geographers 
do. 
But 
I 
don't 
believe 
that 
really 
matters 
because, 
in 
a 
sense, 
all
definitions are 
really 
just 
flags 
of 
convenience, 
just 
figments 
of 
our imagination 
that 
allow 
us
to 
think 
we 
understand 
a 
thing. 
Geography 
is 
too 
big, 
too 
diverse, 
its 
borders 
too 
porous for 
it
to 
fit 
neatly 
into 
one 
single 
definition, 
one 
single 
compartment 
of 
human
 
endeavour.
But 
I 
believe 
it is 
unified. 
Geography 
is unified 
because 
the 
world 
is 
unified. 
The  world
is 
all 
one 
world, as 
images 
taken from 
outside our 
Earth 
so 
c 
learly 
show. 
The 
Earth 
is  
unified
in 
the 
sense 
that 
it is 
one 
shared 
space, 
a 
common 
canvas 
on 
which all 
things are  drawn. 
But
deeper than 
that, 
the 
Earth 
is unified 
because 
all 
things 
upon 
(and 
beyond) 
it 
are
interconnected, forming 
a 
single 
interconnected 
whole. 
No 
single 
thing stands 
isolated 
and
apart 
from 
any 
other: 
people 
are 
connected 
to 
the land 
through 
our 
needs 
for 
food, 
water,
shelter, 
and 
air. 
People 
are 
connected 
to 
each 
other 
in 
ceaseless 
networks 
of 
competition, 
co-
operation, 
and 
need. 
The 
atmosphere 
and 
the 
solid earth, 
the 
circulating 
waters, 
and 
the  cycles
of 
food 
chains, 
the 
nexus 
of 
cause 
and 
effect 
bind 
everything 
together 
in 
one 
whole.  
The
diversity 
of 
the 
world invites 
a 
diversity 
of 
methods 
for 
its 
study. 
There 
is 
no 
single
methodology 
that 
can 
guarantee 
success 
in 
all 
situations: 
methods 
need 
to 
be 
tailored 
to
circumstance. 
In 
this sense, 
the 
diversity 
of 
methodologies 
within 
geography 
should be
regarded 
as 
a 
strength, 
not 
a 
source 
of
 
discord.
The 
world 
is 
not 
compartmentalized; 
all 
subjects 
grade 
one 
into 
the 
other. 
The 
world,
the 
common 
ground 
of 
geographers, 
provides 
us 
with 
our 
point 
of 
reference, 
our 
unity. 
As
geographers 
we 
learn 
to 
read 
the 
world, to 
try 
to 
know 
its 
connections, 
and 
the 
relationships
between diverse 
things, 
to 
try 
to 
understand 
how 
the 
triumphs 
and 
tragedies 
of 
today 
have
unfolded 
from 
the 
worlds 
of 
the past, 
and how 
the 
decisions and 
events 
of 
today 
will 
shape
the world 
of
 
tomorrow.
 
Co
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
:
 
This 
essay 
attempted 
an 
analysis 
of 
Ratzel’s 
political 
geography within 
the 
context 
of 
the
imperialism 
of 
the 
late 
nineteenth 
century. 
The 
practice 
of 
political 
expansion and 
the
incorporation 
of 
foreign societies 
was 
fundamentally 
at 
odds 
with 
the 
nation-state 
ideal that
had 
dominated for 
most 
of 
the 
century, and 
out 
of 
this 
tension 
arose 
new theories 
and
intellectual systems 
better suited 
to 
the 
exigencies 
of 
the 
new status quo. Ratzel’s 
political
geography 
figured 
importantly 
among 
such 
theories. 
Based 
on 
analogies 
between 
the organic
world 
and 
human 
society, 
it 
presented 
a 
thoroughly principled rejection 
of 
the 
nation-state
idea, 
and 
postulated 
instead 
the 
need 
for ongoing 
physical expansion 
to 
insure the 
vitality 
of
the 
state. 
Although 
his 
was 
not 
the 
only 
attempt 
to 
formulate 
such 
a 
theory, 
Ratzel’s 
specific
contribution 
lay 
in 
the 
creation 
of 
an appealing 
system 
and 
terminology 
that 
supplied 
a
seemingly 
’scientific’ 
explanation 
and 
justification 
for 
expansionism (Schulte-Althoff, 
1971:
144). 
In 
a 
materialist 
age 
that 
venerated science, 
this 
was 
of 
considerable 
significance. 
To 
the
extent 
that 
national socialist ideology 
maintained 
continuity with 
the 
nineteenth-century
imperialist 
tradition 
in 
general, 
it 
could 
adopt 
essentially 
as 
its 
own 
the 
core 
of 
Ratzel’s
theory 
of 
biological 
expansionism 
and Lebensraum. Department 
of 
Geography, 
University 
of
Wisconsin,
 
USA.
 
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
ce
s
:
 
o
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/
 
Friedrich_Ratzel
o
https://books.google.com.pk/books/about/ 
Anthropogeographie.html?id=e 
GyLpwAACAAJ&re
dir_esc=y
 
o
https://www.amazon.com/Politische-Geographie-German-Friedrich-Ratzel/dp/114364705X
o
https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&hs=pKa&q=friedrich+ratzel+co
ntribution+to+geography&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi707CMrOLdAhUHzYUKHf
H8DgIQ1QIIxAEoAw&biw=1240&bih=659
o
https://www.google.com/search?q=UNITY+AND+DIVERSITY+BY+RATZEL
&client=opera&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CVrcWjYnFuOEIjhSDb-1T9PT-3Nf-
qZl-yHMLhD-JVe73nct81GzICUyB1OiM-
Slide Note
Embed
Share

Friedrich Ratzel, a prominent German geographer and ethnographer, introduced the concept of Lebensraum, emphasizing the importance of living space for social groups akin to organic organisms. His work was marked by a self-centered viewpoint that rationalized imperialist and racist policies. Ratzel's journey from zoologist to geographer involved extensive fieldwork, including trips to North America, which led to significant contributions in cultural geography. Despite his impactful career, Ratzel's legacy remains controversial due to his association with concepts like Lebensraum and social Darwinism.

  • Friedrich Ratzel
  • Geographer
  • Ethnographer
  • Lebensraum
  • Cultural Geography

Uploaded on Jul 11, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Friedrick Ratzel Introduction: Friedrick Ratzel (August 30, 1844 August 9, 1904) was a German geographer and ethnographer, notable for coining the term Lebensraum "living space." His initial insight was that a social group of human beings in many ways functions similarly to an individual, organic organism, namely seeking the necessities for life and sufficient space in which to find or produce them Lebensraum. However, this concept became problematic when focused specifically on the needs of German people, without regard for others or humankind as a whole. This self- centered viewpoint provided justification for the expansio n of Germany and the subsequent suffering those in other nations, as well as support for social Darwinist rationalization forimperialist and racist policies generally. Life: Friedrich Ratzel was born on August 30, 1844 into an important family in Karlsruhe, Germany. His father was the head of the household staff of the Grand Duke of Baden, a position highly regarded at the time. Friedrich attended high school in Karlsruhe for sixyears before beingapprenticed at age 15 to an apothecary. In 1863 Ratzel went to Rapperswil on the Lake of Zurich, Switzerland, where he began to study the classics. After an additional year as an apothecary at M rs near Krefeld in the Ruhr area (1865-1866), he spent a short time at the high school in Karlsruhe and later became a student of zoologyat the universities of Heidelberg, Jena, and Berlin. He received his Ph.D. in 1868, and the following year published his first work Sein und Werden der organischen Welt, a commentary on Charles Darwin and his ideas.

  2. After the completion of his schooling, Ratzel started to travel, an experience that transformed him from a zoologist/biologist to geographer. He began fieldwork in the Mediterranean, writing letters about his experiences. These letters led to a job as a traveling reporter for the K lnishe Zeitung newspaper, which provided him the means for further travel. His career was interrupted by the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1871. Ratzel joined the army, and traveled through Hungary and over the Carpathians, where he saw villages with German people living in a foreign land. This experience stimulated his interest in human geography and influenced his later work. After the war, Ratzel embarked on several expeditions, the lengthiest and most important being his 1874-1875 trip to North America, Cuba, and Mexico. He studied the influence of people of German origin in the United States, especially intheMidwest, as wellas other ethnicgroups inNorthAmerica. He produced a written work of his account in 1876, Stadte- nd Culturbilder aus Nordamerika, which would help establish the field of cultural geography. According to Ratzel, cities are the best places to study people because life is "blended, compressed, and accelerated" in cities, and they bring out the "greatest, best, most typical aspects of people." Ratzel had traveled to cities such as New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., New Orleans, and San Francisco to conduct hisresearch.

  3. Upon his return in 1875, Ratzel became a lecturer in geography at the Technical High School in Munich. In 1876 he was promoted to assistant professor, which rose to a full professorship in 1880. While at Munich, Ratzel produced several books and established his career as an academic. In 1886, he accepted an appointment at the University of Leipzig. His lectures were widely attended, notably by the influential American geographer Ellen Churchill Semple. Ratzel produced the foundations of human geography in his three- volume Anthropogeographie from 1882 to 1891. This work was misinterpreted by many of his students, creating a number of environmental determinists. He published his work on political geography, Politische Geography, in 1897. It was in this work that Ratzel introduced concepts that contributedto Lebensraum and later to social Darwinism. Ratzel continued his work at Leipzig until his sudden death on August 9, 1904, while on holidaywithhiswifeand daughtersinAmmerland, Germany. Ratzel Contribution andAchievements: Influenced by thinkers like Charles Darwin and zoologist Ernst Heinrich Haeckel, Ratzel wrote on a variety of topics, ranging from zoology and biology to geography, cultural geography, and geostrategy. His famous essay Lebensraum (1901), for example, dealt with the topic of biogeography. Through his writings, Ratzel created a foundation for the uniquely German variantof geopolitics geopolitik. Ratzel s key contribution to geopolitik was the application of the biological concept of growth and development to geography. Until then, states with their borders were considered static, bound to a certain geographic location. States, however, according to Ratzel, are organic and growing, with borders representing only a temporary halt in their movement. Just like a biological organism grows and develops, it is not natural for states to be static. The expanse of a state s borders isa reflection of thehealth of the nation. Ratzel s idea of Raum (space) grew from his organic state conception. His early concept of Lebensraum did not consider political or economic expansion, but rather spiritual and racial nationalist expansion. He regarded the Raum- motiv as a historical driving force, pushing peoples with great Kultur to naturally expand. Space, for Ratzel, was a vague

  4. concept, theoretically unbounded just as was Hitlers later. Raum was defined by where German people live, where other weaker states could serve to support German people economically, and where German culture could fertilize other cultures. However, it ought to be noted that Ratzel did not use his concept of Raum in an aggressive manner, but he simply theorizedabout thenatural expansion of strong states intoareas controlled by weaker states. Ratzel s writings coincided with the development of the Second Industrial Revolution, after the Franco-Prussian War, and the subsequent search for markets, that brought Germany into competition with England. Influenced by the American geostrategist, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Ratzel wrote of aspirations for German naval reach, arguing that sea power, unlike land power, was self-sustaining, as the profit from international trade would pay for the merchant marines. Ratzel's writings were widely welcomed, especially as a justification forGerman imperialexpansion. Legacy: Ratzel's writings, especially his concept of Lebensraum, were used in the development of Social Darwinism. Ratzel influenced numerous scholars in the area of geopolitics. German geostrategist, Karl Haushofer, integrated Ratzel s ideas on the division between sea and land powers into hisown theories, adopting the view that borders arelargely

  5. insignificant, especially as the nation ought to be in a frequent state of struggle with those around it. Rudolf Kjell n was a famous Swedish student of Ratzel's, who further elaborated on his "organic state theory" and who coined the term geopolitics. Kjellen s interpretation of Ratzel was very popular among Nazis, and was used as a justification for German expansionistic politicsleadingto World WarII. Quotations: "A philosophy of the history of the human race, worthy of its name, must begin with the heavens and descend to the earth, must be charged with the conviction that all existence is one a single conception sustained from beginning to end upon one identical law." "Culture grows in places that can adequately support dense labor populations." Ratzel Main Geographic Works: Anthropogeographie: In Anthropogeographie (vol. 1, 1882, and vol. 2, 1891) he considered population distribution, its relation to migration and environment, and also the effects of environment on individuals and societies. His other works included Die Erde und das Leben: Eine vergleichende Erdkunde(1901 02|); Earthand Life:A. Although Ratzel s ideas certainly had an effect in the period after world war I, subjectively he still belonged to Europe s pre-1914 era. This is apparent, for example, from his insistence that spatial growth of the state need not necessarily resemble that of other aggregate-organisms and take the form of an amorphous extrusion beyond existing boundaries into immediately adjacent areas. Rather, he believed that the expansion of advanced states could be a rational and planned affair, accomplished through the selective sending out of groups of excess population for the purposes of colonization (1899-1912: I, 147-48, 167-68). The territorial needs of these groups could be met through land acquisition overseas, in the non-European world (1899-1912: I, 167-68). As noted, Ratzel rejected the idea of territorial expansion on the European continent itself. Moreover, although he did

  6. adopt the view of relations between states as a struggle for space, which meant existence, it may well be argued that he did not necessarily feel that the ultimate outcome of this would be a general armed conflagration. Despite a not infrequently aggressive tone, in important respects his thinking unmistakably reflected some of the dominant optimism of nineteenth- century liberalism. This was an ambiguity that Ratzel shared fully with social darwinism in general, and in his writings as well can be found the vision of the progressive march of civilization toward ultimate perfection. One example of this was his optimistic conviction that the petty squabbles between the nations of Europe would be irresistibly overcome by the further development of international commerce and transportation (1898: 144-45; 1899-1912: I, 242; 1901-1902: II, 676). In this spirit, he may well have ultimately allowed for the possibility of a peaceful and mutually satisfactory solution of the existing space- need through international negotiation and moderation. The outbreak of world war I dashed forever the hope that developments might in fact follow such a course, and Germany s situation after 1918 led rather to an intensification of theideas we havebeendiscussing. The overseas colonies were lost with no prospect of reacquisition, but even more damaging was the loss of territories in Europe itself that the Germans considered to be rightfully theirs. The atmosphere of the 1920s was consequently marked by a sense of mass claustrophobia and obsession with Germany s space-need, an obsession well demonstrated by the remarkable popularity of works such as Hans Grimm s Volk ohne Raum (A people without space) (Grimm, 1927; Smith, 1983), or by the flourishing of the new science of Geopolitik. In such an atmosphere, Ratzel s postulates about Lebensraum seemed to take on a new relevance and urgency (Lange, 1965: 432-33), and his Political geography appeared in its third and definitive edition in 1923. The value of his arguments remained the fact that they seemed to offera scientific basis and justification fortheseconcerns.

  7. FIG: ANTROPO GEOGRAPHIE BY RATZEL Polistiche Geographie: For Ratzel, the cultural development of a state was inseparable from its spatial growth. Consequently, states of limited territorial extent, such as tribal groupings in Africa, were associated with lower levels of development. This condition Ratzel termed K leinraum (1899- 1912:1, 236-38, 241; 1923: 152-53). The advance of civilization was marked everywhere by theprogressive broadening of theterritorial base of thestate. In considering the present and the future, Ratzel declared repeatedly that the territorial base of the European states had become too narrow, and would in the future have to give way to the modern principle of Grossraum. Concerning precisely what was meant by the designation gross, or large, Ratzel remained vague, but judging from his usage it implied a state with physical dimensions greater than those normal or indeed possible on the European continent. Ratzel did not coin this term, which had already been used in the German literature

  8. on political economy some three decades earlier (von Inama-Sternegg, 1869: 9ff; Faber, 1982: 392), but within his system it acquired a new significance. His models came from the non-European world, most notably from the impressive example of the rapid and vibrant colonization of the United States, but included Australia, Russia, and China as well (1905: 476; 1923: 264, 270). These countries, he insisted, exemplified the pattern that was to be the wave of the future: politically unified states based on continental or at least sub continental land masses (Faber, 1982: 392). Ratzel expressed an understandable consternation at the fact that it was indeed the young non- European powers which seemed to have the spatial advantage, but most fundamentally his urging of the Grossraum principle was intended, as was his entire theory, to awaken Germany to the enormity of the stakes in the current struggle forcolonial acquisitions. It is entirely logical that in Ratzel s theory of the state and political expansion the idea of the people as a nation or Volk was accorded only a minor significance. The state for him was an organic whole that developed out of the interaction between a group of people and the territory they occupy - ein Stuck Boden und ein St ck Menschheit, in his famous formulation (1923: 2). It is precisely this shared relationship to the land that waa wnportant in bonding the group together, and not an a priori ethnic or racial kinship. He made this point explicitly in defining the Volk as a politically united body made up of groups and individuals, who need neither to be related ethnically nor linguistically, but who through their common territory are spatially linked together (verbundene) (1923: 3, emphasis added). Ratzel did not deny the existence of ethnicity as such, and even allowed that the circumstance of ethnic kinship had historically been one factor, among many, for fostering cohesion and unity within a state (1923: 141). He left no doubt, however, that in the Europe of his day it was unacceptable to continueto viewethnicor national affinityas theultimate basis for theformation of the state. To the national principle outlined earlier in this essay, Ratzel emphatically contrasted his own geographical or territorial principle, and insisted that in the modern world the basis for a successful state must be the idea of Grossraum. Accordingly, he condemned the striving for an exclusively nationally founded state, or Nationalitdtenpolitik, which represented a dreamy goal for many of his contemporaries in central and Eastern Europe: Ratzel applied this logic with admirable consistency to the situation in his own country. In an early essay, for example, he rejected on principle the claims of the Germans in the Baltic regions to membership in a German state, arguing that this would violate the exclusively geographical or territorial logic which must be the foundation of all political unions (1878: 198). He firmly

  9. adhered to this position in his later work. In so doing, he not only opposed a popular current of the time, but indeed raised fundamental questions at the outset about an issue that was to become nothing less than a holy cause for many of his countrymen. Within the context of the tensions between nation and empire discussed earlier in this essay, the significance of Ratzel s political geography is unmistakable. He has discarded as retrograde the classic nineteenth-century idea of the nation state as the ultimate form of political organization, and offered in its stead something radically different. Presented in the language of the age, using, that is, the scientific precepts of a rudely materialist social darwinism, his system was a coherent formulation and justification of the concern that animated Europe s modern age of imperialism: the drive for political expansion. Its inordinate significance lay in the fact that it replaced an essentially restricted ideal of political organization - limited spatially to the distribution of the nationality and its national territory, and bound at least in theory by notions of international coexistence - with a vision of biologically founded expansion having no ultimate goal besides that of further growth andexpansion. In an early discussion of Ratzel, Franz Neumann identified this fundamental aspect of his thinking and expressed it succinctly with the observation that The laws of movement ... and space cannot be reconciled with the notion of a unified legal and political sovereignty over a specific area (1944: 139). O lder standards of relations between states were overruled by the single exigency of the struggle for space, and success in the endeavour to expand became thesolecriterionformoral judgement. FIG: POLITISCHE GEOGRAPHIE BY RATZEL

  10. Unity in diversity: Unity in diversity is a concept of "unity without uniformity and diversity without fragmentation"[1] that shifts focus from unity based on a mere tolerance of physical, cultural, linguistic, social, religious, political, ideological and/or psychological differences towards a more complex unity based on an understanding that difference enriches human interactions. It has applications in many fields, includingecology, cosmology,philosophy religionand politics. The idea and related phrase is very old and dates back to ancient times in both Western and Eastern Old World cultures. The concept of unity in diversity was used by both the indigenous peoples of North America and Taoist societies in 400 500 B.C. In premodern Western culture, it has existed in an implicit form in certain organic conceptions of the universethat developed inthecivilizations of ancient Greeceand Rome. "Unity in diversity" is used as a popular slogan or motto by a variety of religious and political groups as an expression of harmony and unity between dissimilar individuals or groups. The phrase is a deliberate oxymoron, the rhetorical combination of two antonyms, unitas "unity, oneness" and varietas "variety, variousness". When used in a political context, it isoften used to advocate federalism and multiculturalism. Personal view of ratzel: Geography is the best subject to be part of, because it allows me - if I wish - to explore anything or everything that happens on or near the surface of the Earth. That should be enough to keep anyone happy, however broad their interests. In this Dep artment alone, students and staff can engage in a very broad spectrum of subjects, from glaciology to the oceanography, from the biosphere to the constantly changing atmosphere, from air pollution to human health, and from social inequalities to the views of one Earth offered by the latest satellite and GIS technologies. When we also consider our close partners in Geoscience, that scope widens yet further, to include mountain building, volcanoes, the slow motion of continents, the landscapes of the ancient earth. In St Andrews, as in many other Universities, the boundaries between geography and geoscience/geology are not clear and sharp. They grade seamlessly into one another, just as geography grades into many other disciplines, such as meteorology, sociology, archaeology, history, epidemiology, rock mechanics, physics, and

  11. so on. Geography shares with these adjacent subjects many of their methodologies, techniques, and philosophies , adding yet further to the diversity of geography as it is practiced today. Geography is certainly diverse. Diverse in its subject matter and its methods, diverse in its aims, diverse it its language. So much so that one has to be expert in several sub- dialects of English to hope to converse with all of the staff members in this building. The diversity of geography isnot inquestion.Butisit unified? Many answers have been suggested, and many definitions of geography have been offered. Perhaps no definition will ever satisfy all geographers, nor encompass all of the things that geographers do. But I don't believe that really matters because, in a sense, all definitions are really just flags of convenience, just figments of our imagination that allow us to think we understand a thing. Geography is too big, too diverse, its borders too porous for it to fitneatly intoone singledefinition,one singlecompartmentof human endeavour. But I believe it is unified. Geography is unified because the world is unified. The world is all one world, as images taken from outside our Earth so c learly show. The Earth is unified in the sense that it is one shared space, a common canvas on which all things are drawn. But deeper than that, the Earth is unified because all things upon (and beyond) it are interconnected, forming a single interconnected whole. No single thing stands isolated and apart from any other: people are connected to the land through our needs for food, water, shelter, and air. People are connected to each other in ceaseless networks of competition, co- operation, and need. The atmosphere and the solid earth, the circulating waters, and the cycles of food chains, the nexus of cause and effect bind everything together in one whole. The diversity of the world invites a diversity of methods for its study. There is no single methodology that can guarantee success in all situations: methods need to be tailored to circumstance. In this sense, the diversity of methodologies within geography should be regarded as a strength, not a source of discord. The world is not compartmentalized; all subjects grade one into the other. The world, the common ground of geographers, provides us with our point of reference, our unity. As geographers we learn to read the world, to try to know its connections, and the relationships between diverse things, to try to understand how the triumphs and tragedies of today have unfolded from the worlds of the past, and how the decisions and events of today will shape theworldoftomorrow.

  12. Conclusio n: This essay attempted an analysis of Ratzel s political geography within the context of the imperialism of the late nineteenth century. The practice of political expansion and the incorporation of foreign societies was fundamentally at odds with the nation-state ideal that had dominated for most of the century, and out of this tension arose new theories and intellectual systems better suited to the exigencies of the new status quo. Ratzel s political geography figured importantly among such theories. Based on analogies between the organic world and human society, it presented a thoroughly principled rejection of the nation-state idea, and postulated instead the need for ongoing physical expansion to insure the vitality of the state. Although his was not the only attempt to formulate such a theory, Ratzel s specific contribution lay in the creation of an appealing system and terminology that supplied a seemingly scientific explanation and justification for expansionism (Schulte-Althoff, 1971: 144). In a materialist age that venerated science, this was of considerable significance. To the extent that national socialist ideology maintained continuity with the nineteenth-century imperialist tradition in general, it could adopt essentially as its own the core of Ratzel s theory of biological expansionism and Lebensraum. Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin, USA. References: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Friedrich_Ratzel o https://books.google.com.pk/books/about/ Anthropogeographie.html?id=e GyLpwAACAAJ&re o dir_esc=y https://www.amazon.com/Politische-Geographie-German-Friedrich-Ratzel/dp/114364705X o o https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&hs=pKa&q=friedrich+ratzel+co ntribution+to+geography&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi707CMrOLdAhUHzYUKHf H8DgIQ1QIIxAEoAw&biw=1240&bih=659 o https://www.google.com/search?q=UNITY+AND+DIVERSITY+BY+RATZEL &client=opera&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CVrcWjYnFuOEIjhSDb-1T9PT-3Nf- qZl-yHMLhD-JVe73nct81GzICUyB1OiM-

More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#