The Political System Of Germany

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.

Under the guidance of Bismarck, the Prussian chancellor, the unification of a Kleindeutsch (small Germany) took place in 1871 after Prussia defeated France. There is often historical debate over who was responsible for the unification of Germany. Controversy is caused amongst those who believe that Bismarck was fully responsible for German unification and those who believe other factors played an equally or even more important part. The historian Pflanze is an example of someone who considers Bismarck to be solely responsible, as opposed to Bohme, who gives full credit to economic factors in unifying Germany. However, there is also a middle view, supported by historians such as Medlicott, who argue that Bismarck and other relevant factors

Germany became a unified country in 1871 under the leadership of Otto Von Bismarck. The separate states up until this time were independent, Prussia being the strongest and most influential, followed by Austria. There are several contributing factors to the unification of Germany, the most influential of which being the leadership of Otto Von Bismarck. The three wars that Prussia fought with Denmark, Austria and France also played significant roles in the unification of the German states. Another factor to consider is the increase in support of nationalism around Western Europe at the time, and the changes in German society. Through an evaluation of these factors and relevant sources one can

With incompetent leadership and an unhappy nation, the German people began to realize that their country was in a vulnerable situation and began to look for stable alternatives to democracy. Hitler’s

Between 1815, the end of the Napoleonic Wars, and 1850 the German states experienced a growth of nationalism and the desire for unity. The obstacles to German unification were religious divisions, rulers’ fear of losing power, and the opposition from Austria. The tension and rivalry that existed between the two largest German states intensified and the existing religious divisions and made the possibility of unification more difficult.

After World War I, Germany was left in remnants, and its people were forced to pick up the pieces and build their nation again. Germany began by establishing the Weimar Republic, a parliamentary democracy. However, this democracy proved to be a total failure, and began to crumble. While Germany's government was falling apart, Adolf Hitler was beginning his process of birthing new Nazi Germany. To build this

The Nazi Party’s strength in three main areas allowed it to precipitate the failure of democracy in Germany. Ideologically, structurally and politically the Nazi party was superior to the Weimar Democracy especially in the period 1928-1934. Ideologically, historian Hans Mommson claims the Nazi Party was a “catch all party” in that the party’s nationalistic, socialist and racist policies

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

German history is seen as a ‘painful issue for thousands of Germans and other Europeans’ . However it has interested many historians over the years into inquiring how and why Hitler came to power and how much of this was to do with the failure of parliamentary democracy in Germany. To fully ascertain to what extent these events have in common and what reasons led to the fall of democracy and rise of the Nazis, each have to be looked at individually. Also it seems beneficial, to be able to evaluate these in the relevant context, to look at the situation in Germany was in prior to 1920.

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.

It faced the problems similar to those of Italy. There were 9 cabinets in 1920-28. Moreover, Germany was unified by Bismarck. It inherited from Prussia the tradition of authoritarianism and contempt for democracy. German people were dissatisfied with the inefficient administration of the Weimar government.

Prussia played a large and important role in the unification of Germany. Without Prussia pushing unification along, Germany as we know it today would not exist. The Germanic states would not have unified as they did and the resulting wars that came about never would have played out. World history, not just European history, would be far different without modern day Germany, and the state that led to its emergence; however, Prussia did not unify Germany overnight. Prussia worked up to unification with a series of wars and interactions throughout their history.

Another sign of a “Sonderweg” in Germany during Bismarck’s reign was his attempts to repress threats through force. “Bismarck always held that the best foundation for an alliance was to have a common enemy.” This was illustrated in his Kulturkampf policies in which he attempted to appeal to the Protestant population in the German Empire which made up 61% of the populous by restricting and persecuting the Catholic population. For example, in 1872, religious schools were forced to undergo official inspections carried out by the government and religious teachers were banned from government schools. Then in May 1873 when the May Laws were enacted, nearly half of all seminaries in Prussia closed as a result. Bismarck’s failed attempts to suppress the threat of the socialists through use of the anti-Socialist laws was another sign of a special German path. The laws did not ban the SPD directly but instead aimed to cripple it, so that it was no longer a threat, through various means. Groups meeting who aimed to spread social democrat principles were banned and trade unions were outlawed. Bismarck also introduced old age pensions, accident and unemployment insurance and medical care in an attempt to win the support of the working class and keep them content with the current regime. Despite these attempts to cripple the socialists, the party continued to gain popular support.

Along with every other nation around the globe, Germany has its own unique past. From the days previous to Bismarck to present time, the Germans have undergone significant trials and tribulations. Unfortunately for Germany the world will forever equate German history with Hitler and the Third Reich. As educated people, we need to be able to get past this stigma and appreciate the Germans for who they truly are. After the ending of the Second World War, Germany was divided in two: a free western Germany, and the communist East Germany. West Germany flourished while East Germany struggled to breathe under the heavy shadow of the Soviet Union. In 1990, after the Berlin Wall fell, Germany finally became one again with the union of East

war with a unique goal for its conclusion as his main goal was not to