Pan-Slavism was an effort to unite all Slavic peoples. Even though attempting to unify the Slavs was a noble one, there were still many concerns regarding people’s national and ethnic identity.
There were two different approaches to political issues affecting Pan-Slavism. The first issue was the Eastern Europe as of 1871. The slavic people were spread all over and not merely contained to one region. Any desire to make a Slavic state would be almost impossible. Also to be considered were the populations of Central and Eastern Europe. Slavs were the minority in the German Empire and only in Russia did the Slavic population dominate the total population. Many countries saw this unification attempt as a way for Russia to take over during international rivalries that were taking place at the time. Many proponents of Pan-Slavism saw it as a way to gauge Russian influence. Many nations believed that Pan-Slavism was an “invitation for the Russians to create a universal monarchy” and to “absorb and destroy” nationalities. (Document 11) An Austrian editorial stated that “Austria must put itself at the head of the Slavs and promote their national development.” (Document 5) This would be sure to “destroy all illusions of a Russian Pan-Slavism” and bring favor to Austria. Many Polish people believed that forming a Pan-Slav Empire would “renew an independent Poland” and “destroy the Ottoman and Austrian empires.” (Document 8) Despite the author having Polish bias, it is evident that Pan-Slavism was being used in many countries as a political strategy.
The Russians, as a whole, were not fans of Pan-Slavism. Bakunin, a Russian anarchist, said that there was “no place for Pan-Slavic goals” as there was only “death, darkness, and slave labor” within Russia. (Document 6) He believed that the masses did not have a say in government. Many Russians saw the Pan-Slavism movement as a way to gain Russian sympathy and believed those within the movement only used it to “complain of their sufferings and persecutions.” It was declared that “No Russian ever wanted the reunion of other Slavs with Russia” and that Pan-Slavism existed “among the weakest and most oppressed Slavic peoples.” (Document 14)
There were several cultural issues to be concerned with when looking at Pan-Slavism as well. Proponents of Pan-Slavism argued that “humanity comes after nationality”. They sought to seek identity as “Slavs” rather than be defined as Russians, Czechs, or Poles. (Document 3) Slavs wanted unity as it ignored distinct identities and rather brought their ethnic group together as a whole. A Bulgarian poet argued that a “small federation” of Slavs be built so that “no nationality may be wronged. (Document 9) Protecting the diversity of the Slavs from pro-Russian tendencies was a reason Beust argued for Pan-Slavism. (Document 12) Meanwhile, some Russians felt that their country was united by “faith, blood, and historical tradition” with the Slavic peoples feeling that they had similar fates and that “fraternal feelings” were also present between them. (Document 13) Karel Havlicek, a Czech journalist, stated that the “Slavs are not one nation.” He argued that the word Slav was and should be used as a geographical name as nationality is “not only determined by language but by customs, religion, government, etc. (Document 7) Many argued that there was no single Slavic language, literature or territory as there was ignorance and hatred between different groups within the Slavic ethnicity. Pan-Slavism was a controversial topic and arguably caused more dividing than unifying, as every nation seemed to have a unique opinion on it.