Imperial Germany: 1871-1914

Résumé du document

The Third Reich was founded in France in the Palace of Versailles. It was a statement of German superiority over French. Germany was unified by military victory from above (not a revolution from below). To sign this treaty, Bismarck wore a military uniform (white in the painting but it was an invention). It helped to create the myth of Bismarck as the great unifier. It left a legacy in international relations, in France, in Great-Britain. At the beginning, Britain was not so unhappy France had been defeated. In Germany, it generated an uncontrolled nationalism. The liberals regarded the unification as a triumph of nationalism. They had the absolute majority in the Parliament. The Kaiser could choose his man and appoint his government. The liberals generally supported laws proposed by Bismarck (repressive legislation), although the left liberals were against.

A national system was created, with a single currency, a single system of measure. It was not a centralized strong state but a federal state. Prussia still had power to change the constitution (domination in Bundesart). When Bismarck was chancellor, the Kaiser was weak. In the constitution, Germany was a regime considered as a ‘pseudo-constitutional semi-absolutism' (Wehler) or even an ‘authoritarian nation state' (Mommsen). However, Bismarck was not a dictator. There were strong democratic elements such as the elections, even though elections did not produce the government.

Extraits

[...] Imperial Germany: 1871-1914 The Third Reich was founded in France in the Palace of Versailles. It was a statement of German superiority over French. Germany was unified by military victory from above (not a revolution from below). To sign this treaty, Bismarck wore a military uniform (white in the painting but it was an invention). It helped to create the myth of Bismarck as the great unifier. It left a legacy in international relations, in France, in Great- Britain. At the beginning, Britain was not so unhappy France had been defeated. [...]

[...] It was opposed to colonialism and supported reforms for the working-class and suffrage for females. The SPD was divided between Marxism and revolutionary attentism. For instance, Kautsky and Bernstein were revisionists whereas Liebknecht and Luxembourg were revolutionary anti-militarists. By 1914, the SPD was opposed to the system. References - William Carr, A History of Germanyn 1815- Ch. 4-7 - Lothar Gall, Bismarck: the White Revolutonary, vol 1871 John C.G. Rölh, Germany without Bismarck: the Crisis of the Government in the Second Reich, 1890-1900, esp. pp. [...]

[...] There was a legal framework for capitalism and a well-functioning civil service which fostered industrialization. Moreover, Germany became the best system in the world of education (e.g. PHD is a German invention). The modern social welfare satisfied the working class at this time. The bourgeoisie no longer demanded a democratic liberal state because it realized that the working-class would quickly be in majority. Catholics were a minority They were identified as a potential enemy of the state. Anticlericalism of Bismarck was quite popular. The State stopped subsiding the Church. [...]

[...] These anti-socialists law failed and the SPD emerged around 1890. It became the largest party in 1912 (around 25%).The state was based on the rule of law; it was not based on arbitrary rule as in Tsarist Russia. The Reichstag (parliament) gradually gained importance. Nevertheless, it was not a Parliamentary system parliament against parliamentarism). Germany had a large demographic growth which created issues about constituency (it was unfair). The military had special rights in the constitution. The Kaiser appointed the chief of the Army and the Navy. [...]

[...] Imperial Germany may be considered as a polycratic system: it depended on a strong chancellor and a weak Kaiser. The system could only be stable under Bismarck and could not work when William 2nd arrived in power. He was an immature character who wanted personal rule, although he was a popular Kaiser. There were four chancellors between 1891 and 1900 course'). Caprivi did not consult the Kaiser enough and had to go in 1894. The Kaiser succeeded in gaining personal rules (thesis developed by John Röhl). [...]