Similarities Between Napoleon Bonaparte And Otto Von Bismarck

Throughout history, circumstances have led individuals to develop or modify ideas that which impacted and influenced societies in many different ways. One individual was Napoleon Bonaparte, with his ideas influence on the modern world, which bringing liberal reforms to the numerous territories that he conquered and

Bismarck had near absolute control over his country, and when he resigned his power is passed on to his successors. The following German leaders would ignore The philosophy of realpolitik and favor of militaristic illusions. Otto von Bismarck utilized his leadership as well as philosophy of realpolitik to unify Germany and maintain peace in Europe. Subsequent German leaders would disregard Bismarck's ideals, as his obsession with individual power failed to create a long lasting germany. Thus leaving to a tainted legacy.

This topic can only be analyzed by examining Napoleon in action, so I assessed reports and depictions of Napoleon’s actions on the battlefield from battles such as Toulon, The Battle of the Pyramids, Leipzig, Borodino, and Austerlitz. I also examined comparisons of his tactics to previous tactics to deduce why Napoleon was so successful on the battlefield, despite sometimes being at a numerical disadvantage. Finally, I studied a biography, Napoleon in Egypt, to take an even closer look into his thinking and tactical genius.

There were differences between Hitler and Napoleon, however I feel there were more similarities. They were both immigrants in the country they ended up ruling, both conquered most of Europe, both had radical views about fighting, and both were very quick in their fighting. However, the most significant similarities between the two leaders is how they were accepted as monarchs in a previously democratic society, and what they did for the countries after becoming monarchs.

Bismarck, to many historians, was known for his ability to manipulate the Prussian government, and alliances with other nations to achieve his goal to create the German Empire with the Prussian Kaiser as its leader. Through his idea of Realpolitik, to do whatever deemed necessary to reach a goal, Bismarck manipulated the different parts of the Prussian government and the Foreign policy to unite the German States under the leadership of Prussia’s Kaiser. The problem with Bismarck using Realpolitik is that he could have used illegal methods or methods that exceeded his authority as Prime Minister. Bismarck used methods that exceeded his given authority as Prime Minister, from 1862- 1871, to a small extent. The Kaiser had given Bismarck power that exceeded that normally given to a Prime Minister, but through the expansion of powers of Prime Minister before he entered office, many of Bismarck 's actions were found to be within his authority.

Prince Otto von Bismarck was seen as both a political genius and a power monger, like a Prussian 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: Politics, Culture and Society 1780-1918 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

Both Kaiser Wilhelm and Otto Von Bismarck’s policies differed. In reality, Kaiser based his ideas and was influenced off of Bismarck. Wilhelm II was mostly concerned with the power of the German Navy. He consistently tried to get the best of the best for the navy and always got the latest weapons for them. Also, he attempted to make Germany the predominant world power. His aim to get allies for Germany was a complete failure. When Kaiser tried to reach out and get help and support from Britain, he had failed once again. That was due to the fact that he tried already to get colonies in Africa, The Pacific, and China. At his fault, we were left in isolation and had Austria-Hungary as our only ally. On the other hand, Bismarck’s efforts into getting alliances were much more contributive. Bismarck had began with isolating France and getting Russia and Britain to occasionally check in on France, while also maintaining good ties with Britain. He essentially had a more complex system in that area. The only thing Bismarck was known unsuccessful for ,was the decrease in domestic development for Germany. Kaiser Wilhelm and Otto Von Bismarck constantly disagreed within their foreign policies. The main disparity among these two men were their ages. Kaiser being the youngest had completely different political ideologies than Bismarck (“Otto Von Bismarck)

Napoleon III and Bismarck both had huge impacts on France and Germany respectively. Both men had great diplomatic skills and strong personalities which lead to all sorts of reforms within their nation. Both men are known for their leadership skills and for the Franco-Prussian war, and even though the war technically ended by military means, both of their diplomatic skills had major impacts on the dynamic and outcome of the war. It is unclear to many how the war ended with a Prussian victory; and this is an attempt to explain what led to the war, and how those factors resulted into a Prussian victory.

Bismark seems to be the most important factor of these. He was a successful diplomat with strong anti liberal views. Even though parliament refused to approve taxes for enlarging the Prussian army, Bismark simply carried on collecting them, showing his willingness to go to extreme measures to achieve his aims.

Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898), Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) and Ludwig Erhard (1897-1977) shared similarities and differences within each of their influential political careers, in which these similarities and differences would shape the country of Germany between 1862 and 1966, based on their respective visions for Germany, their implementation of their policies within Germany, and the nature of which they left Germany when they ended their political careers. Bismarck and Hitler were similar in their respective visions for Germany, in which they wanted to unify Germany as a country by their use of policy. Erhard’s vision, however, was to recover the economy of Germany and reconstruct Germany. Bismarck and Erhard were similar in their implementation

Overall, while the foreign policies of Bismarck and Kaiser Wilhelm were not very similar, they did both maintain the Dual and Triple Alliances, and Germany was at the center of European diplomacy during both era’s, however it was in different ways. Therefore, while both policies did not share many similarities, they did have their key differences. For instance, during the rule of Otto Von Bismarck, Germany had a strong and well-developed foreign policy. This is because through the use of foreign policy, Otto Von Bismarck aimed to weaken France, thus ensuring that no other country would attack Germany. Additionally, Bismarck also prevented threats to Germany through use of defensive alliances and cooperative agreements with various countries,

Historians to this day debate about whether Otto Von Bismarck was an opportunist or planner during the time of German unification. This topic of whether he was a planner or opportunist is quite unusual and can have two sides with solid arguments. Bismarck was a man first with a vision of bringing more power to Prussia but soon changed to bringing Germany up and uniting all of the German states. Many believed in him as a visionary who was a key part in uniting Germany and after keeping the peace in Europe which didn’t turn out so well later on.

allows the reader to see how Bismarck friends and foes viewed him as a leader during the

Bismarck’s political successes were remarkable, but he demonstrated an undeniably unethical way of treating internal opposition, coupled by significant opportunism. However, he was succumbing to the broad demands of the public only to be able to carry out the foreign politics necessary to secure the German Reich for the future.

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.