Otto Von Bismarck Realpolitik Essay

In school we are taught that Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves. This statement is reinforced continuously throughout our education, beginning from the time we are in elementary school to when we are in high school. However, it’s never really expounded upon when taught. The discussion never goes further than ‘Abraham Lincoln enacted the Emancipation Proclamation and thus freed the slaves’, but is still able to instill the implication that he did so out of his own moral values and that life for ex-slaves was better for it. The truth of the matter is actually the complete opposite. The emancipation proclamation was a purely political decision that instead of truly freeing the slaves, only served to keep them bound.

With the Civil War in full swing in 1863, President Lincoln was grappling with a nation divided. Long-standing racial turmoils had finally boiled over in 1861 with the battle of Fort Sumter. The country had been thrown headfirst into bloody battles, culminating most recently with the infamous Battle of Antietam. Antietam allowed the president to issue the most important document of his career with a narrow Union “victory”and an attempt to boost low spirits. As a result, the North secured an advantage when Lincoln announced his intent to free all Confederate slaves with the shocking Emancipation Proclamation. Determined on securing and protecting the Union, Lincoln took a pragmatic approach in issuing the controversial document. A defining moment in American history, it is essential to investigates the reasons and acts leading up to it, the responses it elicited from the nation and the world, and its effects on the country.

The freedom of America’s slaves has always been accredited to Abraham Lincoln, but he was not always the complete abolitionist as he is commonly portrayed. The “house divided”, as Lincoln depicts it in his famous ‘House Divided’ speech, of the United States during the Civil War, was not always lead towards the freedom of all mankind, and there is sufficient evidence to support this claim. The sixteenth president is most commonly remembered for inducing the courage and determination to end the Civil War, with the Emancipation Proclamation, although when it more closely studied he did not cross the great divide of enslavement vs. freedom with the submittal of that fabled document. When following the many famous quotes and speeches of Lincoln’s life, it appears that he was against all slavery and bondage. At the same time, when more closely examined, the quotes and speeches actually leaned towards his lack of strong opinion on the outcome of slavery. Lincoln is perceived as the most famous revolutionary of American history, but he does not live up to his legacy of being the eradicator of forced servitude.

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

Although Abraham Lincoln wanted to free African American slaves and thought slavery was wrong he did not believe they should have the same social and political rights. The mid 1800s was a time that separated the black and white race immensely. The northern states and the southern states of the United States was divided on the issues of slavery among other reasons which led to the civil war. The civil war was the beginning of struggling African American slaves journey to freedom with the help of Abraham Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation. Slavery in the northern states never reached the severity in most plantations that it did in the South, and it was common knowledge that being a slave in the South was, in a way, more harsh than the North, leading to a much larger number of slaves being held captive in southern states. Many people in the southern states used biblical passages to justify slavery and said that if slavery was abolished there would be unquestionable chaos and unemployment. Despite all of the people that did not think that slavery was wrong, one man stood and took the blunt of the judgement by the people named Abraham Lincoln. Abraham Lincoln viewed slavery as wrong, but knew that the nation’s founding fathers struggled with how to address the issue of slavery. There were several ideas on how abolish slavery during the 1800s, including colonization and the Emancipation Proclamation, but these ideas were not introduced into law because the general public

On the 1st of January 1863, Abraham Lincoln issued the emancipation Proclamation. It declared that in certain named rebellious areas and states slaves were “forever free” The purpose of the proclamation was on its face military necessity. It authorised the freed slaves to enlist in the military in attempt to bolster the unions army and navy. It was a significant political and military turning point in the civil war, and ultimately the abolition movement. In source A, Douglas T Miller describes the Emancipation Proclamation as ineffective in the liberation of slaves within America, stating “it actually free few people”.

On September 22, 1862, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, issued the first, or preliminary, Emancipation Proclamation. In this document he warned that unless the states of the Confederacy returned to the Union by January 1, 1863, he would declare their slaves to be “forever free.” During the Civil War, he was fighting to save the Union and trying not to free the slaves. Lincoln was quoted to say, “I am not, nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.” The Emancipation Proclamation illustrated this view.

The freedom of America’s slaves has always been accredited to Abraham Lincoln, but he was not always the complete abolitionist as he is commonly portrayed. The “house divided”, as Lincoln depicts it in his famous ‘House Divided’ speech, of the United States during the Civil War, was not always lead towards the freedom of all mankind, and there is sufficient evidence to support this claim. The sixteenth president is most commonly remembered for inducing the courage and determination to end the Civil War, with the Emancipation Proclamation, although when it more closely studied he did not cross the great divide of enslavement vs. freedom with the submittal of that fabled document. When following the many famous quotes and speeches of Lincoln’s life, it appears that he was against all slavery and bondage. Although when they are more closely examined, the quotes and speeches actually leaned towards his lack of strong opinion on the outcome of slavery. Lincoln is perceived as the most famous revolutionary of American history, but he does not live up to his legacy of being the eradicator of forced servitude.

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.

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.

had one of the best education rates to be seen in a long time. Along

In 1861, Wilhelm I succeeded Frederick William to the throne. The liberal parliament declined his cash for changes that would twofold the armed force's quality. Wilhelm saw the parliaments refusal as a noteworthy test to his power. He was upheld in his perspective by the junkers, unequivocally moderate individuals from Prussia's well off landowning class. In 1862, Wilhelm picked A traditionalist junker named Otto Von Bismarck as his PM. Bismarck was an expert of what came to be known as a real politick. This German expression signifies "the legislative issues of reality." The term is utilized to portray intense force governmental issues with no space for optimism. With realpolitik as his style, Bismarck would get to be one of the directing

This alliance with Austria made it so Prussian/German troops had to travel through Austrian territory to attack Denmark. As they traveled, the German troops would aggravate Austrian soldiers by stealing trains and supplies. This aggression lead to Austria declaring war on Germany, and eventually Germany was able to wipe out Austria. A third example of Bismarck’s creativity was when he altered a letter intended for Napoleon III. Bismarck changed the letter to make it seem as if Germany was denouncing Napoleon III and the letter was later published into a German newspaper.