Does the Kaiser Have Personal Rule in Germany?

However, Ludendorff’s plan backfired when Wilson’s Points insisted that Germany lay down all arms and dissolved its army to no more than 100,000 troops, as well as all parties responsible resign (Peukert, 1987; 46). If Wilson’s constitutional reforms were to be implemented a democratic parliament could have been formed (Peukert, 1987; 24). Obviously Germany was reluctant, at first, to accept all of the responsibility of the war. To add to the attempt of keeping Germany a War state and its reluctant surrender, Keiser Wilhelm II ordered a last attempt by the German Naval Fleet to attack. This created a mutiny in Wilhelmshaven on October 28, 1918 and a sailor’s resurrection in Kiel on November 3rd and 4th (Peukert, 1987; 27). The peaceful revolutionary movement has begun in Germany and the citizens began expressing they wanted a new government. During the revolution the Weimar Republic was forming and it seemed to be doing so with little compromise from polar parties. Somehow, the Weimar Constitution was written and the new government began to practice democracy. Most of Germany, by now, wants to be a viable part of the world and achieve a better standard of living, the newly formed Weimar Republic and fragile economy will be tested with the Versailles Treaty.

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.

Bismarck used realpolitiks in his diplomacy and policies, which allowed him to utilize different political ideologies to achieve his goals. In document 5, the socialist actions that Bismarck took are presented. Bismarck insured “workers against industrial accidents” (doc 5). This is an example of realpolitik. Bismarck gained support from the workers, so he could pass Anti-Socialist laws without disorder. This was a way to preserve the traditional order. The Kaiser had intended for his speech to connect with the working class; the working class had previously been ignored and manipulated, but now they were being favored. In Bismarck’s speech, he argues that the state had a duty to provide support for the nation’s “helpless fellow citizens” (doc 6). Furthermore; this exemplifies Bismarck’s practice of realpolitik and his view that “ lasting guarantees of internal peace” was ppossible Bismarck made a serious effort to better the working conditions as a way to avoid a similar event to the radical socialist Paris Commune gaining control. Finally, both sides of the spectrum criticized Bismarck’s shift policies to appeal with differing political groups. In document 2, Wilhelm Liebknecht, who is a socialist, expressed the contempt caused by Bismarck’s

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.

For the longest of time, Europe was led and controlled by the same powers, and to add another country into the already delicate mix, one with drive and determination to become a leading power, would inevitably upset powers, and escalate tension to a further extent. One must also take into account that in order to accomplish this goal of becoming a world power, industrialization was imperative. This brought forth wealth to the middle-class and jobs to the poor, increasing incentive to carry out Weltpolitik. Its significance, however, is highlighted through the increasing of tensions. Countries viewed Germany as an obvious threat, since before the Kaiser himself, and the installation of Welpolitik only heightened such worry.

1) Germany before the Fuhrer. Germany’s defeat at the end of World War I left the nation socially, politically, and economically shattered. The reparation agreements inflicted upon Germany without its’ consent at the end of the war meant that the nation was in complete financial ruin. In the wake of Germany’s defeat, public decent climaxed on the 9th November 1918 during the revolution that took place on Berlin’s Postdamer Platz. This revolution transpired as a result of the public’s culminating discontent towards the imperial monarchy, and lasted up until August 1919, which saw the establishment of the Weimar Republic. In attempts to guide Germany out of economic

When Stresemann came into power in 1923 as Chancellor, Germany was still being affected by the Treaty of Versailles. She still had to pay £6.6 billion in reparations to the allies of the First World War, her military was cut to just 100,000 men, no tanks, air force or submarines and no army in the Rhineland. Additionally, Article 231 (also known as the War Guilt Clause) left the German people angered at the allies and the Treaty of Versailles as they thought that it was unjust. When Stresemann became Chancellor, he had a lot of issues to deal with.

The Daily Telegraph Affair was in 1908, when an interview on foreign affairs, with Kaiser, was published. As the result of the interview Kaiser lost diplomacy as well as damaged his and Germanys reputation. At this point the Chancellor had to step in as he was put in a bad position. The Chancellor told Kaiser that this situation cannot be repeated, to which the Emperor agrees to. However, after doing so he then dismisses the Chancellor. This shows that the Second Reich is a lot more democratic as it shows Nascent Democracy. This is because the Kaiser steps down and lets the Chancellor over take, at the same time he responds to the public's concern by doing so. However, at the same time this also shows Constitutional Monarchy as in a way it seems that Kaiser only did his speech and almost handed over the rest to the Chancellor, which almost seemed

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.

When Kaiser Wilhelm II abdicated and fled, a republic was declared, and a right-wing socialist, Fredrich Ebert, headed a new government, a coalition of several parties, including the Democrats and the

Therefore there was a decline in extremist parties such as the Communists and the National Socialists because many Germans didn’t want an extreme change and liked Germany as it was. This was a turning point for Germany because it seemed that the extremist parties would not be capable of getting seats in the parliament. Also, Stresemann convinced the public that a democratic government would solve any problems quickly- and many believed him. The popularity of the Social Democrats increased and they had the majority of the seats in the parliament (153). This was a turning point for Germany because people started to believe that this new democratic government would remain stable and prosperous for the years to come. The Dawes Plan allowed this to happen because it gave the Republic the money it needed to invest in the economy for the people.

Kaiser Wilhelm II came to power in 1888 after Wilhelm I died and a brief reign from Frederick III, his behaviour could be unpredictable and although he was the grandson of Queen Victoria he was anti-British, however he admired them at the same time. He believed in the divine right of kings, the theory claimed that, kings were only answerable to God, and it was sinful for their subjects to resist them. Wilhelm II was determined to exercise much more direct control over government than his grandfather, this was apparent in 1890 when Wilhelm disagreed with Bismarck’s anti-socialist policies, colonial expansion and relations with Russia, consequently Bismarck retired

When Kaiser Wilhelm 2 was forced to abdicate by the social democrats in 1918 the country was thrown into a chaotic state of disarray, it was Germany’s first attempt at democracy after being ruled by the Kaiser for 47 years. Under the Kaiser’s reign the Reichstag had been refused any important power however now the Reichstag was more important than ever if Germany wanted to be democratic. The Social Democrats were theoretically in charge but they were no-where near being in control as shown by the various coups and rebellions which took place throughout the years. It was evident that there would be problems for the newly founded republic but no one could have foreseen the years of political disorder which would ensue involving a series of disastrous manifestations. These manifestations included, among other things, a failed communist revolution and a right wing coup. I am going to consider each of the factors which I think affected the political state in Germany and decide how their combined impact resulted in the political state of Germany.

The collapse of the Weimar Republic can not be seen as solely indebted to the severe economic problems faced during the period of its rule, but consequently it was the economic issues that became a footstep to the ultimate demise of the Republic. Subsequent to Germany’s defeat in the First World War and German Emperor Kaiser’s abdication from power, the Weimar Republic was proclaimed. The Republic that had emerged from the German Revolution of November 1918 would inevitably fall as a result of numerous issues. However, the extent of which economic problems had in the dissolution of the republic, and how these issues caused or came about due to separate concerns faced by the new democratic system became a major contributing factor.