The Political Life Of Otto Von Bismarck

On April 20, 1889, Adolf Hitler was born in Braunau Am Inn, Austria to Alois Hitler and Klara Pölzl. In the early days of Hitler’s life, he was an unrestrained and carefree child who lived a happy life. His mother was very caring and affectionate towards him while his father spent most of his time either at work or following his hobby of keeping bees. Hitler had an older brother named Alois Hitler Jr. and an older sister named Angela, and a few years after he was born his mom gave birth to another son named Edmund and another sister named Paula. After his father retired and Hitler started to go to school his life began to change. He was no longer able to live his previous carefree lifestyle and now his strict father was going to be watching

The majority of people thought Bismarck was a German enthusiast but in reality he was Prussian. The idea of creating a unified Germany developed only gradually in his mind as an addition the strengthening of Prussia. With this objective in mind, Bismarck transformed the small country of Prussia into a large European superpower with an unbeatable army. To Bismarck, enemies and alliances were only considered important if they were convenient at the time. He was practical and an opportunistic, taking advantage of situations as they developed and prepared to act in many different directions depending on the outcome. For instance, In 1862 Bismarck was appointed chief minister of Prussia; however this title alone was

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

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.

Otto von Bismarck was born on April 1st 1815, in Schonhausen, Northwest of Berlin in the district of

Nationalism and liberalism were two popular political philosophies of the late 19th century. Nationalism is the aspiration of a people with a common language, culture and traditions to be unified. Nationalism grew into a movement after 1815, influenced by literature, music, politics and economic developments between the northern Germany states. By 1848, nationalism was strong among Germans, but the course to unify German would prove to take time.

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

For example, he often worked to improve the lives of the working class, as opposed to caring about noble and bourgeois lives exclusively. In a speech supporting a new bill, Bismarck explains “does the state have the responsibility to care for its helpless fellow citizens, or does it not? I maintain that it does have this duty… the state must help persons in distress and prevent the workers’ complaints” (Document 6). Bismarck concluding that welfare is needed for the working class to keep them happy and healthy is very different than say, Klemens von Metternich, one of the leaders of the Concert of Europe, who could never believe that all men deserve the same rights or quality of living, as classical conservatism preached. This already separates Bismarck from classical conservative views, however there is more to be said from Kaiser Wilhelm I. “The draft bill…[Will insure] workers against industrial accidents… [It should not be forgotten], however, that all those persons who have become unfit for gainful employment through age or disability also have legitimate claim to a greater degree of state welfare” (Document 5). Although previously wealthy people were encouraged to donate to the needy in conservative societies, Bismarck actively made sure the needy maybe would not have to be so needy. Conservatism had in the beginning been more interested in conserving noble power and monarchical rule and

Germany's industrial emphasis can be seen as heightening in this period as a result of their unification; now they had the means of exploiting materials as well as manufacturing it. Part of the reason that during this period, Germany was not seen as an aggressor is due to its Chancellor, Bismarck, who was conscious of the importance of pursuing a peaceful foreign policy and abstained form excessive Imperialism. Berlin, in 1894-95, was the centre for the diplomatic partition of Africa, with Bismarck heading up the talks between the powers. Germany's approach to other countries, and its foreign policy underwent a dramatic change in 1890, when Bismarck was dismissed from office and Caprivi was instated to the position. In

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

During the 19th century, Nationalism was a big player when it came to unity in Europe. The man who played the main role in unification in Germany was Otto von Bismarck. He made progression through three wars. The question people still ask today is, did Otto von Bismarck plan to unify Germany, or did he just take advantage of the opportunities that fell into his lap. Otto Von Bismarck was most definitely a planner as shown through countless actions and statements shown threw his time of power during the three wars. The first war was the Danish war were Germany with the help of Austria took control of the provinces of Schleswig and Holstein. The second war was the Austrian-Prussian war, where there was a disagreement over administrations of Schleswig. The third and final war was the Franco-Prussian war, were France was determined to prevent German Unification.

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