Why was ECONOMIC GAIN more of a cause for WW1 than: Imperialism, Nationalism, military alliance system?
I’m sorry to tell you this, but I think you are on the wrong side of the debate, so about all I can do is show the obstacles that you face. In the early 1900s, most people believed that war would be economically ruinous to all of Europe. In 1909, Norman Angell’s book “The Great Illusion” argued that with the advent of such weapons as the machine guns, barbed wire, efficient artillery, and the like, an army that dug itself into prepared defensive positions could withstand any attack while inflicting devastating casualties on any opponent. As a result, it would be simply too costly to go to war. Other scholars insisted that the economic interdependence of all of the European states had advanced to the point where no one could afford to go to war, and certainly no one could afford an extended war. By contrast, the three choices that you have suggested all have a better basis for claim as the causes of the war.
