To What Extent Was Willhelmine Germany Riddled with Internal Contradictions 1900-1912?

In: Historical Events

Submitted By lostwithoutyou
Words 1290
Pages 6
To what extent was Willhelmine Germany riddled with internal contradictions 1900-1912?

After Germany was unified in 1871 the political structure of the second Reich was adopted as the constitution for the 25 German states. It was written by Bismarck in 1871 and full of contradictions and it favoured the aristocracy and the upper class. The constitution resembled a parliamentary democracy run by publilcly elected bodies such as the Reichstag and the Bundesrat. The political system was fragmented and there were disagreements in economic, social and military matters. This resulted in the internal hierarchy of the country contradicting the promise of a democracy.

Willhelmine Germany was riddled with internal contradictions to quite a large extent as and one of the biggest contradictions in Germany was the constitution itself. Bismarck created the illusion of a parliamentary democracy but kept the power of the elite. The states kept their own government that were in charge of some atters such as suffrage and education. Foreign matters were still controlled by the Kaiser whilst the Bundesrat and the Reichstag had control over the law making process. The Bundesrat, the upper house, is a good example of the illusion of democracy that Bismarck had created; it was made up of 58 members nominated by the states assemblies. It could veto legislation if 14 or more members voted against a bill. Prussia held 17 of the 58 seats which ensured that no legislation was passed without Prussian consent. To elect the members of the Bundesrat they used a "three-class voting system" , this ment that the votes of those who paid more taxes (Junkers, Businessmen, wealthy men) counted for more votes than those who paid less (workers,farmers, and the poor, they made up 92% of the elctorate). This resulted in a conservative domination of the Bundesrat, as the upper classes typically…...

Similar Documents

To What Extent Was Economic Development from 1815 – 1871 the Most Influential in Causing the Unification of Germany in January 1871?

...D. Analysis Reda Belmaachi Question: To what extent was economic development from 1815 – 1871 the most influential in causing the unification of Germany in January 1871? D. Analysis The German economy of 1815 was a disaster, lacking industry and urban areas. Throughout this time the states in Germany started industrializing. The state that played a great role in industrialization of German states was Prussia, its economic policy facilitated trade and economic expansion in Germany. Prussia was also in the main control of the Zollverin, who controlled most of German states. The zollverein was a custom union that involved all the Germans state economic involvement. This also caused a growth of German national consciousness, meaning German states could compare their status in the policy compared to other states, and reflect whether they would be stronger economically stronger or alone. Through the era of the 19Th century, German states developed communication and shipping, largely grew in capital and machine industry, and developed industrially. By the end of 1871 all the German states and especially Prussia, would make the greatest industrial nation of Europe if they combined, and all this economic increase also made nationalism increase. Throughout the summary of evidence, we learn that the economy and especially the industry were rapidly increasing from 1815 to 1871. This expansion formed a sort of bond with all the German states. The states knew if they could......

Words: 701 - Pages: 3

To What Extent Was Hitler's Economic Policy Coherent?

...debate in many different areas, and an important part of it was whether he had control over what happened, and similarly if it was coherent or not. Hitler ‘did’ potentially have control over the economy directly if he wanted to use it, instead he delegated the management of the important thing to subordinates of many different departments and offices, resulting in failure. Hitler did have control, but didn’t use it to his full extent, instead he gave brief outlines of what he wanted done to suit his economic policy. Likewise, his policies were nowhere near coherent if we look between 1933 and 1945, instead his economic policy fluctuated depending on international affairs. [Slide 2] Hitler’s economy was not planned from the start and it never was. Obviously the first steps were to recover from the wall street crash of 1929, but nothing more than that. Instead, what we saw was Hitler shaping his economic policy around the basis that foreign policy drove economy policy, and it was there to satisfy his needs of what he was doing with his military. To prove that his economic policy was not coherent we can take a look at the three main changes between 1933 and 1939, i.e. the recovery period, the rearmament period and the war period. Each is so distinct and so unlike the other that historians have branded them as different eras. In this sense, his policy was not coherent. The only thing that was however, was that it was based around his needs throughout his time in......

Words: 757 - Pages: 4

“to What Extent Was Rapid Economic Growth the Cause of Social Tensions in Wilhelmine Germany?”

...“To what extent was rapid economic growth the cause of social tensions in Wilhelmine Germany?” In Wilhelmine Germany, an industrial revolution was taking place. By 1910, Germany had almost caught up with Britain on the production of industries such as coal and steel, with the rate of growth overwhelmingly surpassing that of the Britons. Germany was also home to new industries, like that of chemicals, which quickly saw 90% of the world’s hair dye exported from Germany alone. However, the impact of a healthy economy was not entirely positive. Rapid economic growth brought an increase in class divisions, as the traditional system came under threat as a result of changing methods. Further, the industrial revolution saw urbanisation become a growing trend as people relocated to the job-filled cities; nonetheless, overcrowding saw a fall in living conditions and a rise in discontent with the working environment, leading to increased membership in trade unions. Moreover, pressure groups began to emerge as funding became readily available and confidence grew among the prosperous public. Although rapid economic growth was the main cause of social tensions in Wilhelmine Germany, the Constitution’s failure to establish the role of the Army led to anger among the public who felt as if they were being ignored by the Kaiser and the Chancellor. In addition, the increased following of socialism caused tensions between the traditional, conservative side of Germany, and those who felt......

Words: 1933 - Pages: 8

To What Extent Was Italy Unified by 1870?

...To what extent was Italy Unified by 1870? By 1870, Italy had finally captured Rome and as a result of this military victory had conquered the whole of the Italian Peninsula. Previously, the Austrians controlled Venetia and Lombardy so subsequently Italy was divided into many different states. However, by 1870, Piedmont had managed to unite all of Italy under one ruler. On the other hand, there were many divisions in this new state leading up to 1870. For example there were many people in the South of Italy who felt that they were being forced to pay and adapt to the Northern Italian way of life. Another issue was that Italy would be a federal state therefore weakening its power and that there would be not a sense of great national unity. Leading on from this in 1870, Italy had a weak government that could not control key political figures such as Garibaldi. There were also problems over the economic integration of this new state and that the infrastructure was poor. Another issue was that Rome and Venice had only been recently captured by the Italians and there was fallout over these recent events. The Pope had failed to recognise that Rome was even part of Italy and many people may have agreed with the Pope such was his influence in those times. By 1870, there were many problems with the South of Italy. The region had a poor economy and there was widespread poverty that was incompatible with the North. Another reason why it was a problem was that there was a lot of......

Words: 1399 - Pages: 6

To What Extent Was Italy Unified by 1870?

...To what extent was Italy Unified by 1870? By 1870, Italy had finally captured Rome and as a result of this military victory had conquered the whole of the Italian Peninsula. Previously, the Austrians controlled Venetia and Lombardy so subsequently Italy was divided into many different states. However, by 1870, Piedmont had managed to unite all of Italy under one ruler. On the other hand, there were many divisions in this new state leading up to 1870. For example there were many people in the South of Italy who felt that they were being forced to pay and adapt to the Northern Italian way of life. Another issue was that Italy would be a federal state therefore weakening its power and that there would be not a sense of great national unity. Leading on from this in 1870, Italy had a weak government that could not control key political figures such as Garibaldi. There were also problems over the economic integration of this new state and that the infrastructure was poor. Another issue was that Rome and Venice had only been recently captured by the Italians and there was fallout over these recent events. The Pope had failed to recognise that Rome was even part of Italy and many people may have agreed with the Pope such was his influence in those times. By 1870, there were many problems with the South of Italy. The region had a poor economy and there was widespread poverty that was incompatible with the North. Another reason why it was a problem was that there was a lot of......

Words: 1399 - Pages: 6

To What Extent Was the Development of the Post

...To what extent was the development of the post - Stalin thaw in superpower relations between 1952 and 1962 the result of Khrushchev's policy of peaceful coexistence? After the death of Stalin in 1953, there was a general improvement in Superpower relations and occasionally both superpowers were willing to meet and negotiate, which in turn led to a much more stable world in comparison to 1945-52 when the Soviet Union was ruled under Stalin’s oppressive regimes. Khrushchev proposed a policy of ‘peaceful coexistence’ although previously proposed by Malenkov’s ‘New Course’, to which the USA responded with ‘New Look’ and ‘Flexible Response’. These changes led to the Post-Stalin thaw witnessing events such as the Geneva Summit and Khrushchev's visit to US. Peaceful coexistence was a hesitant move towards better dialogue between the two superpowers. Khrushchev accepted the Marxist belief that the downfall of capitalism was inevitable, and peaceful coexistence was the best way of conducting relations in the meantime. The fact that by 1949 the division of Europe into two camps, NATO and the Warsaw Pact, had been established and consolidated gave relations between East and West a degree of stability. The Iron Curtain was now a defined line marker the border of recognised spheres of influence, with their positions secure, the superpowers were more willing to attempt negotiation resulting in the thaw. Peaceful coexistence had many successes, including the armistice concluded in Korea,......

Words: 1213 - Pages: 5

To What Extent Was the Kulturkampf a Political Misjudgement by Bismarck?

...To what extent was the Kulturkampf a political misjudgement by Bismarck? [30] The Kulturkampf was launched by Bismarck – President of Prussia – as an attack on the Catholic Centre Party to weaken its political influence and the Catholic community as a whole. It aimed to sway the loyalties of the Catholics away from the Pope and more to the side of the Prussian Kaiser and the German state. The Kulturkampf simply failed due to the fact that Bismarck had miscalculated the extent to which Catholics in Germany were loyal to the Pope. This fact became explicit when the Kulturkampf – through its policies – actually worked to increase support for the Centre Party. This was completely not in favour with Bismarck’s desired outcome of weakening the Party. This Catholic bond transpired to be much stickier than first thought. The’ victimisation’ of Catholics in Germany by Bismarck united them in contempt for the latter instead of weakening them as first desired by Bismarck and was the reason why he reversed the regressive laws put in place to weaken the Centre Party. He realised that he had misjudged the entire situation. It also transpired that Bismarck had pulled the short straw as he had chosen a tough and resilient enemy in the German Catholics. He had effectively consolidated support and sympathy for Catholics in Germany and this was also a primary reason as to why the Kulturkampf failed. Bismarck simply did not know who his biggest enemy was. Also, Protestants’ refusal of......

Words: 606 - Pages: 3

To What Extent Was the Alliance System to Blame for the Outbreak of War in 1914?

...To what extent was the alliance system to blame for the outbreak of war in 1914? The alliance system is an important factor in the outbreak of war in 1914, however it is only one of the causes of the First Word War and many other factors led to the war. These included militarism and nationalism. However the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the most immediate cause. The alliance system in Europe linked countries together in larger groups. Germany’s alliance with Austria- Hungary was responsible for turning the war into a global crisis instead of a local one. Germany pledged to support Austria unconditionally in Austria’s punishment to Serbia for the Assassination of Franz Ferdinand. Russia sent out a partial mobilization when they heard their ally ( Serbia ) was under threat. This triggered responsive mobilizations against Russia from Austria and Germany. France’s alliance with Russia was then brought into the war. Germanys war plan “The Schlieffen plan” was constructed around the idea that a war with France would mean a war with Russia and vice versa. However Britain debated about entering the war when its ally ( France ) was threatened. They finally decided to join in when Belgian were violated by Germany. Imperialism can also be seen as a cause for the first world war. One example of this would be the Second Moroccan Crisis of 1911. France had sent in troops to Morocco in order to help the Sultans government, however, Germany saw this as...

Words: 934 - Pages: 4

To What Extent Was Khruschev Successful in the Destalinisation Policy

...successful was Khrushchev’s policy of destalinization Destalinization was a political reform launched by Soviet Communist Party First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev at the 20th Party Congress, otherwise known as the secret speech. The main components of the reforms were changing or removing prominent institutions that had helped Stalin remain in power; the Stalinist political system, political party members that had supported him (beginning with the arrest and subsequent execution of political rival Lavrentiy Beria) and the removal of the Gulag labour camp system. Khrushchev was desperate to present himself as a reformer, completely breaking away from the reliance of ‘fear into submission’ tactics of the Stalinist era, by presenting himself as a ‘man of the people’. He wished to lessen the gap between the soviet leadership and the people, whilst undermining his predecessors’ dictatorship rule. It has been argued that his attempt to end the use of terror both in political and public life and the reintegration of those who had fallen victim to said terror, was one of the successes of the destalinization policy. This included the released of five million prisoners from labour camps. A total of eight million prisoners had been released by the end of 1956. Shortly after, in 1961, Khrushchev initiated a campaign to rename cities that previously honoured Stalin; Stalingrad was renamed Volgograd. Stalin’s persona was publicly attacked; most importantly in destroying his image,......

Words: 785 - Pages: 4

To What Extent Was Nicholas Ii Responsible for His Own Downfall?

...Jessica Genockey DATE \@ "dddd, d MMMM y" Wednesday, 29 October 2014 How far was Nicholas II responsible for his own downfall? Tsar Nicholas was to a great extent responsible for his own downfall, the main factor being his decision to take over as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces during World War One. Russia was economically and socially ill-prepared for war and the effects and the outcome of the war had a devastating impact upon the Russian people. There had been a continual build-up of discontent towards the Tsar as a result of Russia’s failure in the Russo-Japanese War, the ‘Bloody Sunday’ massacre and the failure of the Duma. However, it was World War One that was the ultimate factor in which the people acted upon their discontent toward the Tsar. Nicholas Romanov was appointed the Tsar of Russia in 1894 after the premature death of his father, Alexander III. Nicholas was thrust into being the Tsar of Russia at an extremely fast pace and was faced with the task of modernising the biggest country in the world to keep pace with the other super powers in the world such as Germany, Britain and the United States. Nicholas did not have the best of relationships with the people of Russia. Russia’s defeats in the Russo-Japanese war damaged the Tsar’s relationship with the people of Russia. ‘Bloody Sunday’ and the 1905 Revolution which followed, the failure of the Dumas, and the relationship that Rasputin had with the Tsar and Tsarina all led to a deteriorating......

Words: 2790 - Pages: 12

To What Extent Was Wilhelmine Germany an Entrenched Authoritarian State?

...To what extent was Wilhelmine Germany an entrenched authoritarian state? The question of whether Wilhelmine Germany was an entrenched authoritarian state has been the subject of much debate, namely the dynamics of the power of the Kaiser over the Reichstag and his chancellors, the Kaiser’s own personality and beliefs, and the challenges to the Kaiser’s rule and the rise of alternative parties. In this essay, I will discuss how the view that the Kaiser held the majority of the power within Germany, although he was constrained by certain obstacles, such as the 1871 Constitution. It could be argued that Wilhelmine Germany was in fact an entrenched authoritarian state. The constitutional balance of powers clearly demonstrates this. The Kaiser’s powers within the constitution show that he had the constitutional authority to rule as an autocratic leader, as he had the ability to appoint and dismiss the chancellor, dissolve the Reichstag, direct foreign policy, and command the armed forces. The Daily Telegraph Affair highlights the fact that the Kaiser was the most politically dominant figure in Germany, as in the interview the Kaiser gave the impression he wanted to form an alliance with Great Britain, thus demonstrating how he, himself, directed foreign policy without the consultation of the Reichstag. Constitutionally, the Kaiser was required to consult with the Reichstag, before acting on his own constitutional authority to propose foreign policy. The Daily Telegraph Affair......

Words: 912 - Pages: 4

To What Extent Was Gustav Stresemann Responsible for the Increased Stability in Germany in the Years 1924-1929?

...To what extent was Gustav Stresemann responsible for the increased stability in Germany in the years 1924-1929? Between the years of 1924 and 1929, Gustav Stresemann had a huge influence over Germany and helped it regain stability after World War One and hyperinflation. Before he took charge and became chancellor in 1923 Germany’s economy was extremely unstable, Stresemann came to power to resolve many of Germany’s issues. There were many reasons why Stresemann was responsible for the stability, some of these included the end of passive resistance, the Dawes plan and the change in currency, all of these were good factors however some did hold some negative effects, He focused on improving the economy, relations with other countries and improving the social aspects of living. Although Stresemann’s actions and policies had both good and bad sides, overall it was because of these that Stresemann is responsible for the regained stability of Germany. Stresemann changed the currency when he became chancellor after 1923 from the deutch mark to the Rentenmark, this put an end to hyperinflation. Hyperinflation meant that the German currency became almost completely worthless with price rising by thousands from one day to the next. By making this change, Stresemann gave the Rentenmark a better value and allowed Germany to get out of the, what seemed endless, hyperinflation. However this had a negative effect too as the money the middle and working class lost during hyperinflation,......

Words: 723 - Pages: 3

To What Extent Was Edward the Confessor a Successful Monarch?

...To what extent was Edward the Confessor a successful monarch? Edward was a successful monarch because throughout his reign there were few rebellions and the kingdom was mostly at peace. However, he could also be considered an unsuccessful monarch as he exiled Godwin and his son Swegn and yet after, renounced their exile. Edward brought Normans to England and gave them positions of power. Robert of Jumièges was brought to England and became the Archbishopric of Canterbury from 1051 to 1052. Another Norman brought over was Ralph the Timid (Ralph of Mantes) who was Edward’s nephew and he was the Earl of Herford from 1051 to 1055/57. These appointments were to the dislike of many Anglo-Saxon nobles, especially Godwin, as they believed that high positions such as Archbishopric were meant to be held by Anglo-Saxons. Edward mainly appointed these Normans because he trusted them more than some Anglo-Saxons, this shows the Edward was very self-sufficient and that he could use his power for things that he wanted, instead of being controlled by Earls such as Godwin. It is also a statement of who is in control and who the leader is. The earldom of Herefordshire was held by Godwin’s son Swegn and so by appointing a Norman to that position it emphasises his power. These are all good qualities of a successful monarch. Because of this ability to cement that he is in charge and show who is in power, there were very few rebellions during Edward’s reign from 1042 to 1066. One of the few......

Words: 771 - Pages: 4

To What Extent Was Henry Vii a Great King.

...Henry VII does not deserve to be called a great king. Above all he was lucky. How far do you agree with this? I agree with this statement to an extent because at certain points during Henry's reign, considering the way in which he dealt with situations, it indicates that Henry was very lucky. For example, when rebellions arose during his rule, he initially never had a plan to follow before the rebellions actually occurred so he was always unprepared for them. The only reason as to why Henry was successful in putting them down was because the rebellions themselves are argued to not be as serious as they seem since they were more or less like protests rather than attempts to seize the throne e.g. the Yorkshire rebellion 1489 which was created by the introduction of parliamentary tax. Also, the fact that there even was rebellions goes to show that Henry wasn't respected and feared among the public which suggests that Henry's rule wasn’t stable and strong so therefore, he wasn't a 'great' king considering he couldn't control the public in his own kingdom. However, I also disagree with this statement due to the fact that Henry did do some considerable activities which suggest that his successful reign wasn’t based on luck and that is was based on his astute reign. For instance, Henry thrivingly controlled his personal finances and lead to them being increased by a considerable amount from a previously empty pot (due to the fact that previous monarchs were involved in civil wars)....

Words: 722 - Pages: 3

To What Extent Was Germany a Parliamentary Democracy in the Years 1900-14?

...this definition in mind, Germany, arguable, had the features of a parliamentary democracy due to suffrage for all males over the age of 25, as well as a large and active trade union movement when compared to that of other European countries at the time. Additionally, the constitution did grant powers (although limited) to the legislative body of the Reichstag and Bundesrat which satisfies the basic expectations of a parliamentary democracy. However, although the constitution of the day had democratic elements, Bismarck was cautious in preserving the power of the elite. As a result, the constitutional powers of the Kaiser meant that he maintained sovereignty and in fact, Germany could arguably have been an entrenched autocracy during the years of 1900-1914. Without doubt, the system of universal suffrage is significant support for parliamentary democracy in Germany during these years. The access to voting for all men over 25 regardless of their social class was a big development and certainly democratic when compared to the limited suffrage of other nations at the time. Evidently, political parties were encouraged to appeal to wider groups in society rather than just the wealthy; The Social Democratic Party, who represented the working class, was able to win majority seats in the Reichstag in the 1912 election. This shows that democracy and representation of the people was present to some extent. Additionally, one could contradict the theory of Germany being an autocracy......

Words: 969 - Pages: 4