Adidas and Puma were founded by two German brothers, Adolf “Adi” and Rudolf Dassler, who were initially partners in a shoe-making business. Their company, Gebrüder Dassler Schuhfabrik – Dassler Brothers Shoe Factory achieved success. Adolf and Rudolf Dassler started their shoe business together in their mother’s laundry room in Herzogenaurach in 1924. They gained recognition at the 1936 Olympics. The best part is that the brothers initially found success with their athletic shoes.  

But their relationship worsened, leading to a bitter feud and the subsequent split. Adolf founded Adidas, while Rudolf founded Puma. The rift between the Dassler brothers, who founded Adidas and Puma, stemmed from a combination of personal and business-related issues. Their contrasting personalities, business philosophies, and a significant misunderstanding during an air raid incident in World War II all contributed to their falling out.

As with many families, even Dassler brothers had tension from their families. The brothers’ wives did not like each other and with operating and living in the same villa, it eventually came to a head during World War II when the Allies were bombing Herzogenaurach, their village. As Adolf and his wife climbed into a bomb shelter already occupied by Rudolf and his wife, he exclaimed, “The dirty bastards are back again,” referring to the Allied forces. Rudolf felt that the remark was directed at him and his family. But Adolf meant it for the Allied forces. The Allied forces in World War II were an international military alliance formed to oppose the Axis powers primarily Germany, Italy, and Japan. The principal members included the UK, US, Soviet Union and China.

World War II significantly reshaped the world by splitting it into two opposing ideological blocs: the Western, democratic, capitalist bloc led by the United States, and the Eastern, communist bloc led by the Soviet Union. This division, known as the cold war, changed the geopolitical scenario and political dynamics. Dassler brothers Businesses had differing views on the business which led to a growing rift between the brothers. Similarly in some other incident Rudolf also muttered some ugly remarks which were not meant for Adolf, but the misunderstanding kept brewing. Further powering the feud was Rudi’s recruitment into the German military and subsequent imprisonment by the Allies. He believed Adi and his wife were responsible for getting him recruited. 

In fact, the bothers could reign the world: Adolf Dassler was known for his focus on product innovation and technical design, while Rudolf Dassler was a Master of Marketing and sales. They could do wonders. But frequent disagreements and tension within the company, made them officially separated in 1924, with Adolf establishing Adidas and Rudolf founding Puma. Sadly, the brothers’ feud extended beyond their business, dividing their hometown and creating a fierce rivalry between the two brands that continues to this day. 

Adidas is strongly associated with football. It’s a global leader in the sport, sponsoring major tournaments like the FIFA World Cup, UEFA Champions Leagues  as well as top clubs and individual players. Adidas’s long history in football, from pioneering innovative boots to supplying official match balls, has cemented its iconic status in the sport. Lionel Messi and David Beckham were long-standing associations with the brand. 

Puma offers hiking and trail running shoes with features like NITRO Foam and PUMAGRIP Attire for traction, they are more widely recognized for their athletic footwear, apparel, and collaborations in football, running, and other sports. Puma’s Explore NITRO hiking shoes are a recent entry into the outdoor market, designed for various terrains. Puma is associated with a wide range of sports, including football, running, basketball, golf, and motorsport. They also have a strong presence in track and field and team sports like handball, rugby, and volleyball. Recently, Puma has also entered the badminton sport. Puma has several global brand ambassadors. Rosé from the South Korean girl group Blackpink is a global ambassador, representing the brand in various campaigns and storytelling. PV Sindhu, the Indian badminton player, is also a global ambassador, with India being the first country to promote badminton for Puma.

This is how the Dassler brothers’ rivalry gave the sports world two great brands, it gave innovative designs and opened a competitive landscape that continues to influence the industry.  The rivalry drove innovation leading to better products. Both Adidas and Puma are leading brand in sports world.

In a global economy, no nation is self-sufficient. Each is involved at different levels in trade to sell what it produces, to acquire what it lacks. The cultural distinctions that affect international business obviously go far beyond the product, price, place or promotion.  Business organizations and nations are inter-dependent.

National character is an expression which describes forms of collective self-perception, sensibility, and conduct which are shared by the individuals who inhabit a nation/state. The term “national character” is used to describe the lasting nature, characteristics and unique life styles found among the populations of particular national states. This behavior is sometimes considered on an abstract level, that is, as cultural behavior without actual reference to necessarily different personality modalities. It may also be considered as motivated by underlying psychological mechanisms characteristic of a given people. National Character comprises of well-designed personality characteristics and patterns that are archetype among the adult members of a society. In other words, it is the sum total of the habits and attitudes, desires and inclinations, views and opinions, motives and standards, beliefs and ideas, and hopes and aspirations of an individual or a group which they share or interact with others in society.

National culture impacts how people interact with each other. In the business world, culture guides decision-making, behavior, thinking patterns and values. Each country has distinguishing national and regional cultural characteristics. The success of any prospective foreign business partnership centers on awareness of and respect for those distinctions. From a handshake, dressing standard, acceptable physical distance during conversation requires sensitivity to avoid misunderstandings. Attitudes differ on humor, punctuality and gestures can make a huge difference to business dealings in foreign countries.

Europe has had a long history of self-conscious awareness of national differences. In normal conversation and in articles we find thoughts of the differences between Danes and Swedes, between Belgians and Dutch, between Germans and Italians, or even between northern and southern Italians, northern and southern Belgians, or northern and southern Dutch. Every national group develops over a period of time based on certain stereotypes of members of other national entities. Commonly held stereotypes get developed for certain objectives, for certain detachments or with changing degrees of approval of the traits. While the perception of behavioral differences has led to a great deal of verbal expression and rough writing, only since the 1940.  Serious efforts been made by anthropologist, psychologists and sociologists to explore systematically the validity or precise nature of the perceived differences with respect to underlying personality formations.

Japanese people believe more in socialism than individualism. They care about the national wellbeing. Therefore, they put more emphasis on harmony with others rather than having their own determined attitude.  Japan is known for its culture of discipline and hard work. It is a testimony to the collective will and discipline of the Japanese people that despite being devastated in World War II, they quickly recovered and became one of the leading economies of the world and are, today, counted as one of the developed countries.  They have a unified national character as people, language, culture, ethos, cuisines, are consistent across the country.

India is a land of diversity. It’s a diverse society, where people from different castes, colour, religion come together to give India a vibrant, dynamic and unique national character. The nation celebrates Diwali, EID and Christmas with equal zeal and vigor. Such diversity is hard to find anywhere else in the world and, therefore, differentiates us from the rest of the world.

In the formulation of implementation of foreign policy, a deep understanding of the character of a nation is one of the vital factors. Such understanding becomes part of almost every phase of foreign policy planning and execution. It helps in solving international problems in the areas of defense, diplomatic dealings, economic, political and trade.

Since a number of the national-character studies were conducted in a period of total war and were concerned with enemy or occupied countries, which were therefore inaccessible to direct research, substitute techniques had to be developed. Research of this kind came to be known as “the study of culture at a distance” (Mead & Métraux 1953). Nationals residing outside their countries were interviewed for reminiscences about child-rearing patterns and social attitudes influencing interpersonal relationships within their national states. In addition, since the societies studied were highly literate and employed mass means of communication, novels, cartoons, newspaper articles, and photographs were all available for systematic analysis. These materials were carefully examined for recurrent themes or other clues to customary attitudes and social perceptions that would point to possible underlying personality differences in the structure or hierarchy of values. The most important resource that is essential for nation building is not money, not big buildings but people. People form the backbone of any country and give it its distinct character.

Margaret Mead, Who is a strong advocate of national character studies has distinguished three approaches. First, there is the analysis of relationships between the basic learning common to children within a nation or culture and later characteristics witnessed in the behavior of adults within the same society. Adults shape up based upon their formative childhood experiences. Second, there are societal studies of the pattern and structure of interpersonal relationships. In any society, there are cultural sanctions operating continually which reinforce behavioral patterns, and thus there is an expected consistency in cultural formations. Third, based on studies comprising simple comparative descriptions of those cultural configurations national character gest distinguished.

A number of studies in national character are concerned with correlating the central role of culturally prevalent child-rearing practices with resultant personality modalities found in the adult. In these studies, variables such as weaning and toilet-training practices are seen as diagnostic of differential formative socialization experiences.

Another type of national-character study examines the basic personality traits that are necessary for at least a working minority of individuals within a society to keep that society functioning on its own terms. When Erich Fromm, the psychoanalyst, discussed national character (1941) he contended that in an industrial society with ever-increasing bureaucratization and standardization of occupations, the personality traits of discipline, orderliness, and punctuality are necessary. These traits have to be present in a significant portion of the population. Sociopolitical interpretations

One of the basic objectives of national-character studies is to examine the tensions underlying the political and social structures of modern states. Social tensions are particularly apparent in societies that are rapidly changing. For example, one type of social tension that is frequently observed results from the systematic attempts of an elite to establish particular patterns of directed social change, in spite of the unavailability of sufficient individuals whose training and social experience equip them for achieving the goals set by the elite. Some national-character studies seek to differentiate between the patterns that are characteristic of the elite and those patterns of the population that have been imposed upon it.

If necessary personality traits are not forthcoming from a proportionate number of individuals within the society, the society will not function well in terms of newer values, whatever the elite controlling the society attempts to do. Even though institutional legal structures are consciously changed in accord with social planning, if characteristic changes in socialization experiences do not accompany these changes in such a manner as to facilitate the appearance of adequate motivational behavior, the sought-after change will not become stabilized and self-perpetuating. With passing time, attitudes become rooted in a system of beliefs, traditions, taboos, habits, customs, and inhibitions constitute the distinctive culture of a state.

Its 100 years today since the World War I broke on 28^th June 1914. I strongly believe all wars defies logic.  Sociologists and psychologists can tell us many of the reasons for war, but when we see the results of war its tragic effects only tell us that war is unreasonable and illogical. Yet it is still unavoidable. Why? What is it in mankind that causes us to war?

The 1^st World war began on a small note when Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia. This seemingly small conflict between two countries spread rapidly: soon, Germany, Russia, Great Britain and France were all drawn into the war, largely because they were involved in treaties that obligated them to defend certain other nations. Western and eastern fronts quickly opened along the borders of Germany and Austria-Hungary. The war drew in all the world’s economic great powers which were assembled in two opposing alliances.

World War I killed more people – more than 9 million soldiers, sailors, and flyers and another 5 million civilians. It involved 28 countries, and cost $ 186 billion in direct costs and another $151 billion in indirect costs. It became a very costly afire. It was the first war to use airplanes, tanks, long range artillery, submarines, and poison gas. It left at least 7 million men permanently disabled. World War I probably had more far-reaching consequences than any other proceeding war. Politically, it resulted in the downfall of four monarchies; Russia in 1917, Austria-Hungary and Germany in 1918, and Turkey in 1922. It contributed to the Bolshevik rise to power in Russia in 1917 and the triumph of fascism in Italy in 1922. It ignited colonial revolts in the Middle East and in Southeast Asia.

The war severely disturbed the European economies and allowed the United States to become the world’s leading creditor and industrial power. The war also brought vast social consequences, including the mass murder of Armenians in Turkey and an influenza epidemic that killed over 25 million people worldwide.

Many socio-economic events reveal the utter unpredictability of the future. At the dawn of the 20th century, most Europeans looked forward to a future of peace and prosperity. Europe has not fought a major war for 100 years because their belief in human progress was shattered by World War I, a war few wanted and few unnecessarily got drawn into it. At any point during the five weeks leading up to the outbreak of fighting the conflict might have been averted. World War I was a product of miscalculation, misunderstanding, and miscommunication.

No one anticipated a war of unimagined magnitude or duration of World War I. At first the armies relied on outdated methods of communication, such as carrier pigeons. The great powers mobilized more than a million horses. But by the time the conflict was over, tanks, submarines, airplane-dropped bombs, machine guns, and poison gas had transformed the nature of modern warfare. In 1918, the Germans fired shells containing both tear gas and lethal chlorine. The tear gas forced the British to remove their gas masks; the chlorine then scarred their faces and killed them.

Conflicts between two nations is ought to take place on various issues; but is war the solution to it? There is little difference between human and animal reaction to war: animals have a strong instinct to fight and defend their territory, humans are no different. What really separates humans from animals is the scale of the fights. The human’s fights are terrifying and blood-spattered. World War I proved that if disputes are to be settled only by war, then human kind will not survive and the whole world will vanish.  – Let’s avoid a third world war.

War is not something that any sane person wants to be involved in. World War 2 is a great example: Hitler was trying to take over the world eventually by committing genocide. He needed to be stopped. Genocide means the systematic destruction of all or part of a racial, ethnic, religious or national group by Killing members of the group. You cannot have someone trying to take over the world, especially in such a gory manner.

Unfortunately war is necessary in some cases. In several cases, the only way to stop certain pretense is through war. Think, if certain rulers hadn’t been deposed through war efforts, where would the world be? Unfortunately there are people and governments that will not change through peaceful talks and beneficial agreements.

Wars often start from silly, petty arguments. It’s proved sometimes war is the outcome of national ego.

Some sociologists feel education is the answer to stop war. They say that if everyone had the best education possible then war, racism and all other social problems would give way to a worldwide peace. But if you look at people who opted for war were most educated, then what happened? Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Eichmann, Joseph Goebbels, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Sadam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic and many others were educated people. Does knowledge breed ego in people? Today, knowledge is given priority in all nations but still the number of wars and their severity has not reduced.

Historically, men and nations attempt to secure peace through political alliances. But, even these have not been able to offer lasting peace. In an address to the United States Senate in 1919, President Woodrow Wilson said, “The League of Nations is the only hope of mankind.” World War I was supposed to have been “The war to end all wars“. But it proved wrong. World War II began only 20 years later.  Thousands of treaties have been made and disbanded.  Our intensions of peace are fanciful, short-lived and fragile; any number of treaties may be formed for peace, but wars are not prevented. It is futile to put all our hope in political alliances.  War cannot create peace and peace cannot create war. It is therefore left to us, to the people of this world whether we want war or peace.

Lastly, some social scientists have envisaged World War III (WWIII, WW3 or the Third World War) to describe a worldwide conflict following World War II. The anticipated dates for the war are from September 1, 2029 – November 11, 2036. The war will break everywhere except Antarctica and most of Africa. The elements for the war would hypothetically be such as Syrian – Turkish border clashes, China’s aggression due to various reasons, same with Russia, economic collapse in word, termination of United Nations, Korea will reunite under democratic government, NATO will occupy the Middle East, dissolution of SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization). SCO is a Eurasian political, economic and military organization which was founded in 2001 in Shanghai by the leaders of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Post war all SCO governments will reconstruct, Palestine will officially gain independence from Israel.

The World War III will result into reinstating of United Nations. China and Russia will have democracy. Both countries’ some province will enjoy democracy while some province will merge with neighborhood countries.

Can World War III be averted? Looking at the world scenario today, possibilities of it cannot be disputed.  But, let us hope that the hypothesis of World War III remains an illusion perpetually.

]]> https://drvidyahattangadi.com/world-war-i-centenary/feed/ 0