Essay On The Differences Between Bismarck And Wilhelm

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.

At the Convention of Gastein, Austria took over a German state. This bad feeling for Austria made Prussia more popular. Bismarck then isolated Austria by persuading Russia, France and Italy to remain neutral towards her. Prussia then defeated Austria in a war. Afterwards, the Prussian king and generals wanted to finish Austria off, however, Bismarck showed strength and wouldn't let them. Instead he made peace with Austria to ensure her future support. Bismarck stated: "We shall need Austria's strength ourselves". A good example of opportunism is when Bismarck goaded France into declaring war by editing the EMS telegram. Bismarck edited the telegram to make it seem as if Prussia had insulted France. This angered Napoleon and he declared war. This made France seem like the aggressor, which ensured the neutrality of the other powers. Bismarck described it as: "a red rag to a Gallic bull". All of these points show that Bismarck undoubtedly played an important role in unifying Germany.

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.

Otto von Bismarck is widely known as the first modern politician. Because of this, his interpretation of conservatism is different and is the first of its kind. The reason Bismarck represents a new and different kind of conservatism is that unlike traditional conservatives, Bismarck is willing to adapt his views to fit the people's current needs. While Bismarck's methods can be considered traditionally conservative in his early days as a political leader, with things such as the Anti-Socialist Acts, by looking deeper and analyzing what he did later in life shows that he was a more modern conservative. Some examples of Bismarck’s modern conservatism were his restraint on letting Germany go to war with any other country, and his policy of separation of church and state. Compared to other leaders like Napoleon III, Bismarck had the ability to plan and invest in Germany’s future. Bismarck supported this by being able to change his views and ideas when it became necessary. Bismarck’s time was born when the Franco-Prussian war began. This is what led to Bismarck becoming so famous at the time, as his military victories were heard of all over

Weltpolitik, an extension of Kaiser Wilhelm II’s ‘New Course’ initiative, directly contradicting the quiet policies of Bismarck. Through Weltpolitik, the Kaiser sought to begin an expansionist period in Germany. Where Bismarck had favored a quiet foreign policy, Kaiser Wilhelm II had a contrary view. Weltpolitik involved an aggressive foreign policy, primarily through the acquisition of colonies in Africa (Mittelafrika). In order to do so, naval improvement had to take place, thus leading to the Naval Race involving both Germany and Britain, an important factor when considering the escalation of tension in pre-WW1 Europe. A second key importance of Weltpolitik, was that it sought to justify Germany’s place as a leading power in central Europe (Mitteleuropa). Most German people craved “a place in the sun”, and

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

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.

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.

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

By bringing this to their attention, he wanted others to feel sympathetic for him and gain support for his party. In the eyes of the socialists, Bismarck’s policies represented traditionalism conservatism, but their frustrated opinions were only a reaction to his conservative policies, because his actions directly affected them and restricted their social parties. Thus, Bismarck’s policies reducing the influence of socialism and religion over society reveal that some of his government represented traditional conservatism, but the majority of his policies illustrate a new kind of conservatism. Bismarck’s government displayed a new kind of conservatism because he issued laws and policies in Germany that reflected the beliefs of other ideologies in order to conserve his power. For example, Bismarck adopted ideas from Liberalism, Socialism, and Ultramontane, revealing that his policies were flexible enough to satisfy the beliefs of different ideological groups (Document 4).

Bismarck wanted to show Germany as a powerful and dominating European country, but William wanted to show off Germany’s world power status. In 1890, Bismarck proposed a plan to tighten legislation against the socialist party. William opposed this plan, causing a constitutional crisis and allowing him to gain political strength for Prussian nobility. William II, with the support of the army, forced Bismarck into a position that eventually lead Bismarck to offer his resignation. Bismarck had led Germany so far; it was a surprise to many when William accepted the resignation of Bismarck.

In order to fully understand the role the Treaty of Versailles played in the initial upcoming of Adolf Hitler, we must first delve into the reasoning behind German involvement in World War One. Since the late 1800s, Germany was intent on expanding its borders, by any means necessary. Otto von Bismarck, Chancellor of Germany, was obsessed with his desire to “create a German Empire out of the group of smaller German states” mainly under Austria-Hungary’s authority (Schmidt, 2006). In order to expel Austria as the primary influence over these smaller German states, war was inevitable. Subsequently following the war, also known as the Seven Weeks War, Bismarck extorted the small German states of “Schleswig, Holstein, Hanover, Hesse, Nassau, and Frankfurt, which created the North German Federation” (Schmidt, 2006). Even more importantly, Austria was successfully displaced as the major influence over those small German states. Bismarck’s next calculated move was to achieve the same unification in the southern parts of Germany.

Purpose: The purpose is to learn more about Bismarck’s personal life and personality. Since Taylor had already written two previous books describing Bismarck’s foreign policy this biography helps to understand his policies better.