Bismarck Conservatism Analysis

Guida Diehl was the founder and leader of the Newland Movement, which pre-dated the Nazi Party by at least six years. She came from a nationalist and anti-Semitic family, and only joined the Nazi Party in August 1930. Following the advice of Adolf Stocker, who hated Jews and supported the emancipation of unmarried women, she attended social-work school and later worked as a teacher of social work in Frankfurt. Diehl constantly preached a spiritualist, quasi-Christian, and nationalist message, that went against the postwar values of Americanism, materialism, and mammonism, which threatened to overpower Volk, God, and fatherland.

Germany started out as a divided nation fighting for dominance in Europe. Otto Von Bismarck was able to take this struggling complexity and unify it. During this process Bismarck turned the small country of Prussia into a powerhouse, growing the population from 11 to 18 million. Bismarck sprung from a landlord class and moved his way up the political ladder as realpolitik, realistic Politician. He was a man of simple ideals; he stressed duty, service, order, and the fear of God. These ideals along with manipulative tactics are what lead Bismarck on his journey of the unification of Germany, proving that without Bismarck’s diplomatic efforts between 1871 and 1890 Europe would not be the stabilized continent it is today.

First, Bismarck's policies reflect a new kind of conservatism. Legislation passed by Bismarck’s government are described in document 1. In 1869 through 1878, the government under Bismarck granted freedom of religion and access to citizenship, civil rights, and political office. These policies were created by Bismarck to gain support for his position as chancellor. In document 3, Wagner, a supporter of Bismarck, explains that “the

His demand that he is in the middle between Russia and France is what his map of Africa looks like (D3). Bismarck was most concerned with power politics on the European continent; his comments regarding imperialism seem somewhat ironic (POV). Careful treaties with native chiefs of Independent State of Congo were made between Mr. Henry M. Stanley and several soldiers having whole villages have been signed away to their Majesty (D6). This was seen as an anti-imperialist attitude because of cultural reasons, villages being signed away it was all negative. Economic negative attitudes are seen when the Resolution of the German Social Democratic Party Congress, 1900 speaks that World and colonial power is pursued for capitalist exploitation and for displaying military force which corresponds to the greedy desire of the bourgeoisie to invest its ever-increasing capital and to the desire for new markets which each country tries to usurp to itself. This had a negative attitude because it’s mentioning how colonial power only brings severe greedy consequences upon each country and should not be enforced. The resolution from the German Social Democratic Party Congress is probably a biased source since as socialists they would naturally condemn a capitalist agenda (D9).

As president, Bismarck led Germany into unification through his opportunism and his various policies. Charismatic yet aggressive by nature, Bismarck was known for his ability to seize opportunities and manipulate situations to his advantage. It is debatable whether or not Germany would have achieved unification under the power of anyone other Bismarck. In his 1996 book The Problem of the German Nation State, Wolfgang Mommsen said, “Bismarck’s policies- admirable or satanic... occupy centre stage.” This is particularly true for his infamous policy of “blood and iron”. Also, Bismarck’s diplomatic abilities are able to be seen when looking at his foreign policy of 1871 to 1890. Bismarck’s policies and opportunism are predominantly evident when looking at the Three Wars.

Throughout history men have been struggling to become the strongest or most dominant force in society. Scores of men, throughout history, have taken notice that it is easier to control several smaller states as opposed to one unified state. In the late 15th and early 16th centuries a man by the name of Nicolo Machiavelli reflected the actions of famous men and their assent to power in his book The Prince. If Machiavelli's advice was followed, a ruler could almost guarantee success. But perhaps the first politician in the modern world to follow the advice of The Prince, was a man by the name of Otto Eduard Leopold von Bismarck.

While the religious division of the Prussia Protestant and that of the dominating Austria Catholics was an important factor, the opposition from Austria and the rulers were more important. Nationalism became this progressively intensifying cycle that eventually climaxes into war. Many began to put aside the idealistic ideas of society and began to embrace the realities of society as competitive and combative. Under the calculated guidance of Otto von Bismarck, Germany would finally be on the promising path of unification.

It has been said by several historians that the second half of the nineteenth century was the ‘Age of Bismarck.’ In the mid 1800’s Bismarck provided dynamic leadership- a trait which had been lacking during the events of 1848-89. Ian Mitchell stated “Bismarck was everywhere.” However, there has been a considerable degree of debate concerning the role of Bismarck in the unification of Germany. Some argue that unification would have been inevitable and had nothing to do with Bismarck, although others argue that the unification was solely down to Bismarck’s role. There are differing opinions on whether Bismarck was a planner or an opportunist or whether he was merely just

Prince Otto von Bismarck was seen as both a political genius and a power monger, like a German version of Alexander the Great by the people. Bismarck was a conservative, who used the people around him to reach his goals; and in doing so, he pitted people against one another. According to the book 19th Century Germany by John Breuilly, modern historians have found it very hard “to separate the man from his achievements” (Breuilly 172). The historians have run into a roadblock that consists mostly of “Bismarck’s individuality and his responsibility for the political development of the Empire” (Breuilly 172). Bismarck was known to support nationalism and patriotism, and he believed in the Burschenschaften or student organizations. He also believed in the concept of faith in power, more in ideas. Bismarck only cared for two things: Prussia and Prussian power, and he would do anything to obtain Prussian domination. Although Bismarck did not care for Germany, he was all for German Unification. Historians cannot decide if Bismarck’s legacy is positive or negative but they agree that he was a “brilliant and shrewd tactician who succeeded in postponing the problem of political mobilization for 60 years” (Breuilly 172). In Otto von Bismarck, some people saw a great man who was ahead of his time, while others saw nothing more than a bloodthirsty power monger, who wanted a united Germany to

Otto von Bismarck was the prime minister of Germany during the time of German unification, formerly the prime minister of Prussia. Bismarck struck quite the nationalist chord in the German peoples, convincing the southern German states to join the the northern ones. He was known as a hardcore conservative, however he was a practitioner of realpolitik, and was able to approve policies that appealed to different ideologies for the sake of the country. Otto von Bismarck’s specific brand of conservatism was different than classic conservatism in that Bismarck attempted to appeal more to the working class, and he had a good few liberal policies. However, Bismarck also had traditionally conservative ideas, such as suppressing opposing views.

The United States as compared to Bismarck Model and other universal health care systems is lacking control and so fragmented especially to other nations. Bismarck Model or as stated in the text book “the insurance model” is known as the oldest health care model (Kovner & Knickman, 2011). Although, every employer and employee (payroll deductions) contributes according to income (Kovner & Knickman, 2011). Bismarck varies in the “basic coverage” from one country to another (Kovner & Knickman, 2011). Found in Germany, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland, Latin America, and Japan (Kovner & Knickman, 2011). This is not quite like the United States, where the funds go to the government (Kovner & Knickman, 2011).

The leading drive in Prussia for unification was a man named Otto Von Bismarck. Otto Von Bismarck was a master strategist that initiated a series of

After the 1881 elections, his party no longer controlled the Reichstag (The German House of Representatives). He had to do something to regain some of the lost power since the elections (Sempell 148). Bismarck did not see the need for colonies in Africa, but public opinion forced him to enter upon the global game of imperialism (150). This pleased Germany's constituents, and it eventually led to the obtainment of many valuable resources.

Bismarck and Kaiser Wilhelm were two German officials around the time of world war one. They both had foreign policies and they were both pretty different. Bismarck’s foreign policy had many aims. One of the aims was to leave territorial expansion behind. He unified Germany and to do so had to incorporate many other states into Prussia. He was also very much in favor of peace instead of war. He also never tried to strengthen the naval forces of Germany especially not to ruin the relationship with England. Next, he decided to keep France isolated as well as friendless so that could not start a war as revenge. He also focused on Germany 's relationship with Austria and Russia. He also distrusted Italy.

Value: As this source is written from previous biographies and a few monographs, it’s value is that it covers the events from the time Bismarck rose to power up to the unification of Germany and beyond. It reveals how Bismarck made all his political moves and it gives a better insight of Bismarck’s personal life and decisions he made regarding the at the time when the issue of German unification was