Examining
the Leadership of Bismarck; Chancellor of Germany.
Dallas
Swim
CHY4U
04/05/08
Mrs. Bryans
Otto
von Bismarck was one of Germany’s greatest political leaders. He
designed many cunning policies, agreements, and compromises which
allowed for the unification of Germany. The vastness of his
achievement is difficult to analyze, but above all else he was an
excellent leader of men because he knew how to get what he wanted in
a timely fashion. He was able to easily negotiate through most
obstacles with diplomacy, and the issues he could not solve with
words he solved with blood and iron. In doing so, he was able to
transform Germany into one of the most advanced and wealthy nations
in the world. Therefore, Bismarck’s leadership skills were of the
highest caliber, making him one of the most important men in German
history. As one historian puts it;
He
conceived his purpose to be the consolidation of past gains and the
maintenance of Germany’s military and economic strength. So massive
and awesome was his personality, so obvious his achievement, that the
world saw Germany a great monolith of strength and power. (Dill, 146)
Bismarck’s
legacy doubtlessly justifies his title of the ‘Iron Chancellor’.
In a series of three successful military campaigns, Bismarck was able
to unify Germany and establish the German Empire. One of the earliest
and most prominent examples of his leadership occurred during the
years 1863-1866. In these years Bismarck was able ally the two
strongest forces in the German Confederation to defeat Denmark. The
forces were Prussia, which had been governed and strongly promoted by
Bismarck, and Austria, which had been a long time rival of Bismarck’s
unification plans, but the German nations prevailed in the end.
However, Prussia soon went to war against Austria, defeated it, and
Bismarck was able to unify Germany even more, which goes to show that
he was a formidable leader. Later, he took advantage of newly
constructed railways in Germany to deploy Prussian troops. This,
combined with other cunning strategies proved especially effective in
the Franco-Prussian war of 1870, where Prussian forces had a decisive
victory over the French. Throughout his political career, Bismarck
implemented a series of cunning economic and domestic policies aimed
at benefiting the working class to improve Germany, and his ideas
were almost always successful. His new workers policies were among
the most advanced and carefully thought out decisions of the time.
All of these events help support the notion that Bismarck was an
excellent leader, and his political skill was widely recognized
throughout Europe.
In
the early 60’s of the 19th
century Germany was a Confederation of loosely bound principalities.
Bismarck, who was a conservative Junker, became the Prussian Prime
minister in 1862, and he “pursued an aggressive ruthless policy
aimed at [German] unification.” (Dill, 146) One step he made toward
unification occurred in 1864 when Prussia allied with Austria against
Denmark. They did so because succession of two Duchies, Schelswig and
Holstein, was disputed after Fredrick VII’s death in 1863. The
conflict resulted in a swift victory for Prussia and Austria, and in
Vienna in August 1864 the King of Denmark “had to give up all his
rights to the Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia.” (Eyck,
93) The two great German states became allies. These events paved the
way for unification in Germany because it was Bismarck’s dream to
“unite German Austria with the German Empire...” (Hitler, 11)
However, tensions between Austria and Prussia soon increased. Austria
was disconcerted over the outcome of the conflict against Denmark
regarding Bismarck’s post-war policies. Bismarck proposed a
“reorganization of the German confederation, including the creation
of a national assembly elected by universal male suffrage.” (Newman
et al, 297) Despite Austria’s rejection of this he did not waver on
his decision, which caused an “unpleasant situation for the
Austrian government.” (Eyck 95) This unpleasant situation developed
into a much larger problem when Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria
thought “war was an inevitable consequence of Bismarck’s
proposal.” (Newman et al, 297) Here again do we see an example of
Bismarck’s exceptional leadership. The strength of his Prussian
military under the command of Helmuth von Moltke combined with
Bismarck’s political talent led to the defeat of Austria in the
Austro-Prussian war of 1866. The outcome of this war had far-reaching
consequences that lead to the development of a reformed German
confederation and greater Prussian strength in Germany. It became
clear that by now Bismarck was “not only fearless but absolutely
reckless.” (Eyck, 94) Reckless as he was, he was still quite
capable of making sound decisions regarding German unification and
interests. The results of the war in Denmark and the Austro-Prussian
war are proof of that.
Although
Bismarck’s victories over both Denmark and Austria led to German
unification to some extent, there was still much more work to be
done. One of the hardest tests of his leadership came when Prussia
went to war with France. One of the reasons that this war came about
was because Prussia’s victory over Austria increased tensions with
France and Napoleon III feared that a powerful Germany would change
the balance of power in Europe. Bismarck did not go out of his way to
avoid war with France. As one source puts it, “the war’s origins
were petty, but its consequences were profound.” (Newman et all,
297) The outbreak of war was the result of France’s decision to
block the German Prince Leopold from obtaining the Spanish throne
when it was offered to him. Upon hearing about this, the German
people were infuriated and therefore supportive of military force
against France, though this was also due in part from Bismarck’s
manipulation of the media which made France look like the aggressors.
Upon reading a newspaper altered by Bismarck, King William exclaimed:
“This means war!” (Eyck, 173) Political mistakes made by Napoleon
at this time “delivered himself into Bismarck’s hands.” (ibid,
172) The Franco-Prussian war was yet another decisive victory for
Prussia, with France being defeated in every battle. The most
important outcome of the war was the “unification of the German
people in a great Reich.” (ibid, 174) The Treaty of Frankfurt
imposed harsh terms for the French, who had to “pay 5 billion
francs and endure German occupation for the three years it would take
to complete payment.” (Newman et al, 174) Clearly Prussian victory
over France paved the way for German prosperity at the time. However,
Bismarck opposed annexation because he did not want to be France’s
permanent enemy. It was shortly after the war that Bismarck acted to
secure unification in Germany by providing special concessions to
southern German states if they agreed to unification, which was
largely successful. One of the ways he accomplished this was by
pursuing Friedenspolitik
(policy
of peace) in order that “the new German state might digest the
achievements of the earlier period.” (Dill, 146) Bismarck was able
to gain enough support from the German federation of 25 constituent
states to form the German Empire, and to add insult to the French
defeat, William I was declared the German Emperor at Versailles,
Louis XIV’s former palace, on 18th
January 1871.
One
the German Empire had been established, Bismarck devoted nearly all
of his political cunning and leadership abilities towards improving
the Empire both economically and socially. He was widely concerned
with improving the German economy, and with the “general spirit of
material progress and expansion, which Bismarck seemed to symbolize
at the time.” (Dill, 148) One of the ways he fostered German
economic development was by aiding faltering industries by limiting
free trade and “asked for an increase in indirect taxation by the
introduction of a protectionist tariff.” (Eyck, 253) This caused
problems with the National Liberals who supported free trade, but
“the protective tariff legislation of 1879… reduced the flow of
foreign goods into German markets.” (Dill, 160) His opposition was
strong but “it is true that in almost every major issue he managed
to get what he wanted.” (ibid 155) And while it is true that not
all of his undertakings were stellar (i.e. the Kulturkampf),
it is quite clear that “Germany was transformed economically… she
evolved an imposing economic system.” (ibid, 160) This evolution is
due in part to Bismarck’s strategic economic policies. But Bismarck
was not only concerned with the economic well-being of German
industry, for he also cared for the workers. In 1881 he “introduced
his new program of social legislation, perhaps the most constructive
of his whole career.” (ibid, 164) This legislation “emphasized
the right and duty of the state to protect the workers.” (ibid,
164) Here we have the beginnings of modern workers benefits, because
they had not existed before Bismarck. Therefore, Bismarck’s
unwavering determination to improve German economic and social
conditions was successful because of his ability to get what he
wanted because he was a respected political leader.
Bismarck
was considered medieval in his undertakings. Perhaps this was because
he was rooted in iron logic, and refused to back down on his ideas
since “the results of his actions are more far reaching than those
of any other statesman of his time.” (Eyck, ix) He succeeded in
almost every confrontation, whether on the battlefield or in the
Reichstag. Jules Favre, a respected French statesman, referred to him
as “a statesman who surpasses everything he can imagine.” (ibid,
ix) He has had numerous historical books recount his legacy, and
while not everything he dealt with resulted in universal acceptance,
there is no doubt that “he had intellectual ascendancy over all the
politicians of his time, and his superiority was acknowledged not
only by his own people, but by foreign statesmen all over Europe.”
(ibid, ix) To have such qualities is impossible without powerful
leadership skills. Therefore, Bismarck’s leadership skills were
highly regarded, making him one of the most prominent individuals in
German history.
Reference List
Dill Jr., Marhsall.
(1961). Germany: A Modern History. Ann Arbor, Univ. of
Michigan Press.
Eyck, Erich.
(1964). Bismarck and the German Empire. Norton Library, Norton
& Company.
Hitler, Adolf.
(1939). Mein Kampf. Hurst & Blackett Ltd.
Newman, Garfield
(et al). (2002). Legacy: The West and the World. McGraw-Hill
Ryerson Limited.
Bismarck notes 2
German unification
Defeat of Denmark and Austria
- Germany consisted of a multitude of principalities loosely bound together as members of the German Confederation
- He used diplomacy and the Prussian military to achieve unification
- Excluded Austria from unified Germany – wanted to make Prussia the most powerful and dominant component of the nation
- Faced diplomatic crisis when Fredrick VII of Denmark died in 1863 – Succession of Schleswig (Christian IX) and Holstein (Augustenburg) was disputed – Prussian public favored Augustenburg
- Bismarck favored Christian IX under London Protocol, but denounced his decision to annex the duchy of Schleswig to Denmark property.
- Issued ultimatum for Christian to return Schleswig to former status – Denmark refused so Austria and Prussia invaded – Second war of Schleswig – Denmark was forced to cede both duchies
- Prussia received Schleswig, Austria received Holstein
- 1866 – Austria reneged on prior agreement by demanding Diet to determine Schleswig-Holstein issue – Bismarck used this as excuse to fight Austria – Austrians had violated the Convention of Gastein.
- Start of the Austro-Prussian War
- Albrecht von Roon – Prussian army leader, also Helmuth von Moltke the Elder – Prussia fought battles it was able to win.
- Bismarck made secret alliance with Italy – desired Austrian-controlled Venetia – Italy’s entrance into the war forced Austrians to divide their forces
- Prussia quickly defeated Austria and its allies, much to the surprise of Europe
- Crushing victory at the Battle of Sadowa – Peace of Prague in 1866 dissolved German Confederation – Prussia annexed many cities
- Austria promised not to interfere with German affairs.
- Prussia and several North German states joined North German Confederation in 1867 – King Wilhelm I was President
- Bismarck was Chancellor
- Lead to “The Misery of Austria” – Austria served as a mere vassal to the superior Germany
- Military success brought Bismarck tremendous political support in Prussia
- Liberals suffered major defeat in 1866 – new conservative House on much better terms with Bismarck
The Reptiles Slush Fund
After 1866 war Bismarck annexed Kingdom of Hanover – King George V allowed to keep 50% of the crown assets – rest gone to state assets and national treasury
Bismarck accused George of organizing a plot against state – sequestered his share (16 million thalers) in 1868
Bismarck used this money to set up secret slush fund used to bribe journalists and discredit his political enemies – used some funds to support King Ludwig II of Bavaria for making William I German Emperor
Also funds used to place informers in household of Crown Prince Fredrick and Victoria – bogus stories by Bismarck planted in newspapers accused royal couple of acting as British agents by revealing state secrets to British government
They planned to reform the fatal flaws in the executive branch that Bismarck would create for himself
The office of Chancellor responsible to the Kaiser would be replaced with British-style cabinet – ministers responsible to Reichstag Government policy would be based on the consensus of the cabinet
Bismarck planned to use future Kaiser William II as a weapon against his parents in order to retain his own power
He would drill William on his prerogatives and would teach him to be insubordinate to his parents
William II developed a dysfunctional relationship with parents
Establishment of the German Empire
Prussian victory over Austria increased tensions with France
Napoleon III feared that a powerful Germany would change balance of power in Europe
Bismarck did not avoid war with France – believed that German states perceived France as the aggressor – unite behind the King of Prussia
German prince Leopold offered Spanish throne – France blocked candidacy
Bismarck provoked France to fight Prussia by publishing Ems Dispatch – conversation between King Wilhelm and French ambassador to Prussia
France declared war July 19th 1870 (Franco-Prussian war in 1870)
This was a great success for Prussia
German army commanded by Helmuth von Moltke the Elder – won victory after victory
French defeated every battle
Bismarck opposed annexation because he did not wish to make permanent enemy of France
Bismarck acted immediately to secure unification of Germany – negotiated with representatives of southern German states – special concessions if they agreed to unification which succeeded
King Wilhelm proclaimed German Emperor 18th January 1871 at Versailles
New German Empire was a federation with 25 constituent states
“Man cannot create the current of events. He can only float with them, and steer”
Chancellor of the German Empire
1871 – Bismarck raised to the rank of Furst (Prince) von Bismarck
Appointed Imperial Chancellor of the German Empire, retained his Prussian offices as well
Bismarck had a large amount of control over domestic and foreign policy
One of his primary concerns was to reduce Catholic church in Germany – may have been due to anti-liberal message of Pope Pius IX
Bismarck feared that the pope would use the definition of the doctrine, Syllabus of Errors (1864) Papal infallibility (1870), as a political weapon for creating instability by driving a wedge between Catholics and Protestants
Attempted, unsuccessfully, to reach an understanding with other European governments – future papal elections would be manipulated
Bismarck believed that Catholics had too much political power – concerned about the emergence of the Catholic Centre Party
Anti-Catholic campaign known as Kulturkampf – Catholic department of Prussian Ministry of Culture was abolished in 1871
Jesuits were expelled from Germany in 1872
Abandoned Kulturkampf in 1878 – it had won Bismarck a new supporter in National Liberal Party – his chief ally in the Reichstag
Long depression in 1873 after Vienna Stock Exchange crash – downturn hit German economy first time since industrial development in early 1850s
He aided faltering industries by abandoning free trade and established protectionist tariffs – alienated National Liberals who supported free trade
Bismarck returned to conservative factions
He became worried about Polish presence – was a threat to German state
He was worried about the growth of the socialist movement – instituted Anti-Socialist Laws in 1878
Tried to reduce to appeal of Socialism to the public – appease the working class
Enacted social reforms considered to be the first European labor laws – Health Insurance Act of 1883 – Accident insurance 1884 – old age pensions and disability in 1889 – other laws restricted employment of women and children
Foreign Policies
Devoted himself to keeping peace in Europe so strength of German Empire would not be threatened
Forced to contend with French revanchism – desire to avenge loss of Franco-Prussian War
Bismarck developed policy of diplomatically isolating France – maintained good relations with other nations in Europe
Kept peace with UK by declining to seek a colonial empire or an expansion of the navy
1872 – offered friendship to the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russia – joined Wilhelm I in League of the Three Emperors
Bismarck maintained good relations with Italy – partially responsible for Italian Unification
His role in pursuing the 1866 Austro-Prussian War against Austria allowed Italy to truly annex Venetia – had been an Austrian vassal state since 1815
1870 Franco-Prussian War made Napoleon III remove French troops from Rome and The Papal States
Italian Unification would have been hindered otherwise
Russia’s victory over Ottoman Empire in Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) – Bismarck helped negotiate Congress of Berlin – Treaty of Berlin (1878) revised Treaty of San Stefano – reducing great advantages it gave to Russia in southeastern Europe
Bismarck and other European leaders opposed growth of Russian influence – tried to protect power of Ottoman Empire
Russo-German relations suffered
He negotiated Dual alliance in 1879 with Austria-Hungary – became Triple Alliance with Italy
Opposed to seeking colonies at first due to the maintenance cost – however they did colonize some places in Africa later
“From its foundation until his dismissal in 1890, the German Empire was dominated by Bismarck.” (Dill 146)
“In the early 60s he pursued an aggressive ruthless policy aimed at unification. After 1871 he pursued a Friedenspolitik (“policy of peace”) in order that the new German state might digest the achievements of the earlier period.”(Dill 146)
“The man who had with calculation risked war now became the man who would do almost anything to avoid war.” (Dill 146)
“He conceived his purpose to be the consolidation of past gains and the maintenance of Germany’s military and economic strength. So massive and awesome was his personality, so obvious his achievement, that the world saw Germany a great monolith of strength and power.” (Dill 146)
“The conservatives had two major interests: Prussia, and their agricultural livelihoods. As far as the first was concerned, they felt that Bismarck had neglected purely Prussian concerns in favor of general German ones; they viewed the new empire with a good deal of mistrust.” (Dill 147)
“It was not until Bismarck’s watershed year of 1879 (when the question of the protective tariff, so dear to the agrarians, arose) that the Conservatives shifted from opposition to support of the government.” (Dill 147)
“…for the chancellor felt that a republic was a weaker form of government than a monarchy, and above all, he wanted a weak France.” (Dill 147)
“During the decade of the seventies Bismarck looked for his principal support to the National Liberal party which at the time was the largest single party in the Reichstag. It was mainly the party of big business and industrial interests, which were rapidly becoming so very important.” (Dill 147)
“They were also in sympathy with the general spirit of material progress and expansion, which Bismarck seemed to symbolize at the time.” (Dill 148)
“The Kulturekampf, Bismarck’s attack on the Roman Catholic church, is generally regarded as one of his least successful undertakings.” (Dill 151)
“In 1887 the chancellor enjoyed his ultimate triumph and undertook his last shift in party alignment. On this occasion the issue was the so-called Septennate, or bill by which army estimates would be considered by the Reichstag only every seven years.” (Dill 155)
“It is true that in almost every major issue he managed to get what he wanted. However, he left behind him a heritage of discontent and bitterness veiled by his apparent outward success.” (Dill 155)
“The great single fact about Germany in the period under consideration is her phenomenal economic development. This and its implications, both social and political, dwarf the other aspects of German life.” (Dill 156)
“By the turn of the twentieth century Germany was transformed economically. Not only has she evolved an imposing economic system, but this system was largely in the hands of a relatively small number of extremely influential men.” (Dill 160)
“In 1881 Bismarck introduced his new program of social legislation, perhaps the most constructive series of acts of his whole career. Both in addresses of his own and in the speech from the throne, he emphasized the right and the duty of the state to protect the welfare of the workers. He introduced a bill calling for a system of health insurance providing for both medical attention and half pay in case of illness. Insurance funds were provided, to be paid for by employer, employee, and the state.” (Dill 165)
“Finally in 1889 an even more grandiose project was passed, namely an old age and invalidity pension act. In this act the state did contribute one-third of the fund.” (Dill 164)
“Bismarck had on the whole preserved friendly relations with the Italians. He had helped them to acquire Venetia in 1866.” (Dill 183)
“…the result was the formation by Germany, Austria, and Italy of the Triple Alliance, which remained in force until Italy denounced it in 1915.” (Dill 183)
“It looked by then as if Bismarck had pretty completely achieved his aim of security. Germany was closely allied to Austria-Hungary and Italy; she maintained some control over Russia in the League of the Three Emperors; she had a line to Great Britain through the latter’s friendship with Austria and Italy; she had even brought Romania into her orbit by acceding in 1883 to a defensive alliance between Austria and Romania, which was transparently aimed at Russia.” (Dill 183)
“Morally speaking, it seems clear that the Reinsurance Treaty was far from the spirit of the arrangement arrived at with Austria. Critics of Bismarck see in this treaty a prime example of his cynicism and unscrupulousness; his admirers see in it an extraordinarily astute technique for preserving peace n any contingency.” (Dill 185)
“The full complexity of Bismarck’s system appears at its height in a series of agreements collectively known as the First Mediterranean Agreement and signed in the early months of 1887.” (Dill 185)
“The panorama of Bismarck’s diplomatic achievement is an impressive one. He succeeded in preserving peace; he made himself and Berlin pretty much the pivots of European international politics during the seventies and eighties. He has been lauded on all sides for his diplomatic shrewdness. One authority likes to describe him as the successful states-man of “limited nobility,” as opposed to William II and Hitler whom he characterizes as the unsuccessful statesmen of “unlimited liability.” It would be foolish to underestimate Bismarck’s diplomatic astuteness or the massive sum of his achievement. Yet even in the field of international affairs his heritage was not without disadvantage. The tying of the destinies of Germany to those of Austria-Hungary was to prove a drag and eventually to be the direct means of leading the empire to its doom. The establishment of far-flung colonies in time called for the creation of a strong navy and Germany’s consequent immersion into Weltpolitik (“world politics”), which was to be so dangerously tempting to Emperor William II. Even in his own chosen field of diplomacy Bismarck’s achievement, though very considerable, is not to be admired without reservation.” (Dill 187)
“In the earlier years Bismarck traced a course which was often diplomatically aggressive and several times risked the possibility of war.” (Dill 178)
“Though the complexities of the elaborate alliance system which Bismarck constructed to keep the peace are very great, the principals underlying his moves are not difficult to discern and are logical. Since peace was the overriding consideration, it was essential to prevent any alliance of powers even potentially unfriendly to Germany. His particular horror was that an alliance might develop between France and Russia, with the result that Germany might be forced to fight a war on two fronts simultaneously. The logical consequence of this fear was the Germany had to be closely aligned with either France or Russia.” (Dill 178)
“It was Bismarck’s dream to unite German Austria with the German Empire…” (Hitler 11)
“It must be remembered in this connection that conditions in Austria were quite different from those which characterized the German State as founded by Bismarck. Germany was faced with only one difficulty, which was that of transforming the purely political traditions, because throughout the whole of Bismarck’s Germany there was a common cultural basis. The German Empire contained only members of one and the same racial or national stock, with the exception of a few minor foreign fragments.” (Hitler 66)
“Once we understand the part played by that absurd notion of conquering the world by peaceful commercial means we can clearly understand how that other absurdity, the Triple Alliance, came to exist. With what State then could an alliance have been made? In alliance with Austria we could not acquire new territory by military means, even in Europe. And this very fact was the real reason for the inner weakness of the Triple Alliance. A Bismarck could permit himself such a makeshift for the necessities of the moment, but certainly not any of his bungling successors, and least of all when the foundations no longer existed on which Bismarck had formed the Triple Alliance. In Bismarck’s time Austria could still be looked upon as a German State; but the gradual introduction of universal suffrage turned the country into a parliamentary Babel, in which the German voice was scarcely audible.” (Hitler 123)
“The work of Bismarck must now be carried on.” (Hitler 135)
“It was because there were no adequate spiritual motives back of this offensive that Bismarck was compelled to hand over the administration of his socialist legislative measures to the judgment and approval of those circles which were themselves the product of the Marxist teaching. Thus a very ludicrous state of affairs prevailed when the Iron Chancellor surrendered the fate of his struggle against Marxism to the goodwill of the bourgeois democracy. He left the goat to take care of the garden. But this was only the necessary result of the failure to find a fundamentally new Weltanschhauung which would attract devoted champions to its cause and could be established on the ground from which Marxism had been driven out. And thus the result of the Bismarckian campaign was deplorable.” (Hitler 143)
“This very wide difference between the functions of a political philosopher and a practical political leader is the reason why the qualifications necessary for both functions are scarcely ever found associated in the same person. This applies especially to the so-called successful politician of the smaller kind, whose activity is indeed hardly more than practicing the art of doing the possible, as Bismarck modestly defined the art of politics in general.” (Hitler 170)
“It was thus that an act of statesmanship was accomplished whereby the Germans, princes as well as people, established the future Reich and restored the symbol of the Imperial Crown. Bismarck’s State was not founded on treason and assassination by deserters and shirkers but by the regiments that had fought at the front. This unique birth and baptism of fire sufficed of them to surround the Second Empire with an aureole of historical splendour such as few of the older States could lay claim to.” (Hitler 180)
The lack of orientation in German policy, both domestic and foreign, was obvious to everyone who was not purposely blind. The best thing that could be said about the practice of making compromises is that it seemed outwardly to be in harmony with Bismarck’s axiom that ‘politics is the art of the possible’. But Bismarck was a slightly different man from the Chancellors who followed him. This difference allowed the former to apply that formula to the very essence of his policy, while in the mouths of the others it took on an utterly different significance. When he uttered that phrase Bismarck meant to say that in order to attain a definite political end all possible means should be employed or at least that all possibilities should be tried. But his successors see in that phrase only a solemn declaration that one is not necessarily bound to have political principles or any definite political aims at all. And the political leaders of the Reich at that time had no far-seeing policy. Here, again, the necessary foundation was lacking, namely, a definite Weltanschauung, and these leaders also lacked that clear insight into the laws of political evolution which is a necessary quality in political leadership.” (Hitler 211)
“Even though the narrow-minded German bourgeoisie should keep up a passive resistance when the hour of deliverance is at hand, as they did in Bismarck’s time, we shall never have to fear any active resistance on their part, because of their recognized proverbial cowardice.” (261)
“Surely ‘Federal Activities’ is not the phrase with which to describe an effort to dissolve and dismember another federal state. For an honest federalist, for whom the formula used by Bismarck to define his idea of the Reich is not a counterfeit phrase, could not in the same breath express the desire to cut off portions of the Prussian State, which was created or at least completed by Bismarck. Nor could he publicly support such a separatist attempt.” (Hitler 427)
“The sovereign rights which the individual states renounced in order to form the Reich were voluntarily ceded only to a very small degree. For the most part they had no practical existence or they were simply taken by Prussia under the pressure of her preponderant power. The principle followed by Bismarck was not to give the Reich what he could take from the individual states but to demand from the individual states only what was absolutely necessary for the Reich. A moderate and wise policy. On the one side Bismarck showed the greatest regard for customs and traditions; on the other side his policy secured for the new Reich from its foundation onwards a great measure of love and willing co-operation. But it would be a fundamental error to attribute Bismarck’s decision to any conviction on his part that the Reich was thus acquiring all the rights of sovereignty which would suffice for all time. That was far from Bismarck’s idea. On the contrary, he wished to leave over for the future what it would be difficult to carry through at the moment and might not have been readily agreed to by the individual states. He trusted to the leveling effect of time and to the pressure exercised by the process of evolution, the steady action of which appeared more effective than an attempt to break the resistance which the individual states offered at the moment. By this policy he showed his great ability in the art of statesmanship. And, as a matter of fact, the sovereignty of the Reich has continually increased at the cost of the sovereignty of the individual states. The passing of time has achieved what Bismarck hoped it would.” (Hitler 433)
“Bismarck’s Reich was free and unhampered by any obligations towards the outside world. Bismarck’s Reich never had to shoulder such heavy and entirely unproductive obligations as those to which Germany was subjected under the Dawes Plan. Also in domestic affairs Bismarck’s Reich was able to limit its powers to a few matters that were absolutely necessary for its existence. Therefore it could dispense with the necessity of a financial control over these states and could live from their contributions.” (Hitler 434)
“They say that Bismarck laid great importance on the value of good relations with Russia. To a certain extent, that is true. But they quite forget to add that he laid equal stress on the importance of good relations with Italy, for example. Indeed, the same Herr von Bismarck once concluded an alliance with Italy so that he might more easily settle accounts with Austria.” (Hitler 501)
“Moreover, Bismarck looked upon the colonial and trade policy of his time with mixed feelings, because what he most desired was to assure the best possibilities of consolidating and internally strengthening the state system which he himself had created. That was the sole ground on which he then welcomed the Russian defense in his rear, so as to give him a free hand for his activities in the West.” (Hitler 501)
