Greatest Rulers of Germany

Napoleon was good for Germany, whereas Bitchmark was not. and Barbarossa was a nobody, he did create nothing that did nto already exist.

Napolean wasn't good for anyone!  Bismark was the "founder" of the current Germany!

Actually, he did not annex anything.  The other German states came willingly to the new country he was trying to form.

Originally posted by MixcoatlToltecahtecuhtli Bismarck didn't care about uniting Germany. If he really did, he should have been more cooperative in 1848. The unification of 1871 was rather the annexation of other German states by Prussia.

 

Bismark dreamed of a unified german empire. In 1848, the Germanic Confederation still existed which was domianted by Austria, and so if there was a unification at this time it would probably have been to the Habsbourg name which wouldn't really have been a unification but anexation. This could explain Bismark not being cooperative at the time. In any case, what the american says is true, the german states came willingly seeing how Prussia could defend them against surrounding powers which had the intention of assimilating them. (cough cough FRANCE)

Bismark was a great man.

ps: Any yes he was a bit two faced with foreign politics (realpolitik) but his policy did lead his nation to relatively peaceful success following 1871 and massive economic growth...

I can really talk much about that but i try to sum it up:

- after the napoleonic wars there was the idea of creatign a new German empire after the old was finally dissovled by NAPOLEON

- after Revolutionaric events in France the same year, the national convention of Frankfurt in 1848 offered the emperors crown to the king Wilhelm I. of Prussia, btu he denied with the reason that he would not accept a crown through the will of the common people (only through the will fo god - an oldfashioned idea). a minor episode of this was the entry of Prussian troops into Baden which had due to it's close vicinity to France become a source of liberal movements in Germany. there they shot the freedom activist Hecker and the Grandduke fo Baden got almost deposed his throne...

- when Bismarck took over Prussian foreign affairs he had to eclipse Austrian influence in Germany, Austria was the only real rival to Prussias quest for the creation of an Imperial Germany

- however when in 1866 war broke out between Prussia and Austria, almost ALL German minor states sided with Austria, NOT Prussia, except for some smaller neighbours of Prussia like Mecklenburg who were traditional allies of Prussia (and Italy).

- Prussia won the war and by offering a very favourable peace to Austria, Prussias way was open to create a new empire. this alliance would later lead to the entry of Germany into WW1 and to WW1 itself.

- when the Spanish monarch died and the crown of Spain was offered to the Swabian line of the Hohenzollern rulers, Napoleon III demanded a guarantee of Prussia that no Hohenzollern ruler would ever become ruler of Spain, so to encircle France. even though the Hohenzollern did not wanted to becoem rulers of Spain, they did not wnated to give a guarantee for this. Bismarck saw hi hour come, he "modified" the bulletin of teh emperor of France to the ruler to make it read more offensive before it reached the Prussian king. Prussia was then pushed into war with France by Bismarck.

- Bismarck managed to get the support of the minor German coutnries which followed Prussias call to arms and France was ultimately beaten one year later. now Bismarck saw the time come for the creation of Germany. however, preceedign to the election of the German emperor it turned out that the German states would elect Ludwig II of Bavaria to become the German emperor, obviously in fear of Prussian domination, but Bismarck took Alsace-Lorraine in the peace treaty, an act that would create an arch-enemy to Germany for the next 50 years to come. in face of French retaliations for the humilatign peace treaty, the minor German states had vote for Wilhelm I. of Prussia, because only Prussia was able to guarantee the security of teh smaller German states, so Wilhelm became Emperor of Germany.

I've prooven my case now

Edited by Temujin

Bismarck was the personification of the inevitable unification of the splintered Germany into a Nation state,but and this is a very big but, only under the pre-condition that it would be totally dominated by the Prussia the overwhelming political force in Germany.. One has to understand the regional differences in Germany, past and present, why this condition met with opposition from the smaller southern kingdoms and principalities.
Prussia was quite rightly seen as authoritarian, conservative and militaristic that in 1848 had prevented Germany from becoming a democratic state.
This democratic movement had, as a generation earlier just after the French Revolution, its main supporters in the non-prussian territories of South-West Germany. Bismarck himself fought all his life, first against any liberalisation of German politics and later against the emerging workers' movements.
However, the unification was in terms of the economic and political development of Germany as a whole an absolut necessary and thus progressive development. As a competitor against the other industrialised and colonial powers, mainly England and France, Germany could only function as a unity.
So, Bismarck's role was an ambigous one, positive for the unification of Germany, negative in bringing the whole of Germany under Prussian domination.


Edited by Komnenos

Originally posted by Temujin what necessity? why is Switzerland the richest country in the world? because it annexed it's neighbours into a greater empire under the umbrella of nationalism? this shows again hwo today people get misinformed by pro-Prussian written history books, fortunately our teachers were not...there'S NO necessity nor reason for a unified Germany

I don�t think, you can compare the development of Switzerland and Germany.
Switzerland found it�s niche as a low-scale industrialized, finance service based country that could prosper under centuries of relatively stable political conditions.

Germany in the mid 19th century was a emerging industrialized nation whose growth was stilted by the presence of splintered political administration, various taxation systems and internal borders.
There are similarities with the European Union here:
The realty of a common economic market in Germany in mid 19th century made these internal restriction obsolete and the political unification just mirrored the economic, a process that repeated it self in Europe over the last four decades.
As in most other countries, the development of capitalism made the nation state necessary, and the nation state then allowed the full expansion of capitalism.
I�m not arguing for or against these development, or for or against Bismarck and Prussia, I�m just saying that the unification of Germany was a historical inevitability based on economic realities.

But now to the far more interesting point in your post:

Originally posted by Temujin ...and anyways, as long as Austria, Luxemburg and Liechtenstein are independent, there's no unified Germany at all anyways.

What�s that then? Pan-Germanism rearing its ugly head? I just hope you�re joking.

Originally posted by Temujin Originally posted by The Golden Phallanx THe true people of these states and greater germany sympothized for Prussia. says who?

Says every german history professor. Go ask one.

Originally posted by Temujin K and you've said in a previous comment bismark did nothing for germany, are you now siding with him or not? I dont' see what you've proven with this Plz try and state your argument before you start proving it, 's koo? you fail to see that this thread is about Germany and not Prussia...

How did I suggest in any way that this thread is only about Prussia and not Germany in that comment? Stop making supportless assumptions and start reading what I actually say.

Originally posted by Temujin Originally posted by Komnenos However, the unification was in terms of the economic and political development of Germany as a whole an absolut necessary and thus progressive development. As a competitor against the other industrialised and colonial powers, mainly England and France, Germany could only function as a unity. what necessity? why is Switzerland the richest country in the world? because it annexed it's neighbours into a greater empire under the umbrella of nationalism? this shows again hwo today people get misinformed by pro-Prussian written history books, fortunately our teachers were not...there'S NO necessity nor reason for a unified Germany...and anyways, as long as Austria, Luxemburg and Liechtenstein are independent, there's no unified Germany at all anyways.

SWITZERLAND IS NOT THE RICHEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. The purchasing power of switzerland is roughly 200 billion american dollars, and that of germany is roughly 2.4 Trillion dollars. You have absolutely no sense where the world economy is at do you? Even if you're talking of per capita income which you did not indicate, the swiss are not richer than any german, brit or scandinavian. Now how can u possibly say there is no reason for unification? What in the world is your logic behind that? Do u have any idea what the german people went through while not unified?

All of eastern France used to be german lands, much of poland, the check republik, and even as far as russia were all german at one point as well, and when I say german I mean the majority of the inhabitants were german speaking. But through being not unified other nations forced the german people off their land and into already crowded places. The seperated weak german states were extremely easy land pickings, and as land targets they served. Unification brings strength of numbers. THe german unification was the most essential thing ever to come by that country, had they not unified the german language might not even exist today, and it's ppl without rights dominated by neighbour imperialistic powers who would have conquerred the tiny states long since. That or mercantilised them like colonies.

"there'S NO necessity nor reason for a unified Germany" THat is the most absurd comment I've heard in a long time. Do more reading.

Originally posted by temujin because it annexed it's neighbours into a greater empire under the umbrella of nationalism?

Prussia did not annexe it's neighbours, it unifed it's fellow germans into a nation that would withstand foreign tyranny. Now I'm not justifying war in any way, but I am defending the unification of germany.

 

 

Edited by The Golden Phallanx

Originally posted by The Golden Phallanx Originally posted by Temujin says who? Says every german history professor. Go ask one. ect blabla

in case you haven't noticed until this point...I f**king AM german, so don't tell me what Germans think about Prussia or not or how Prussia is Germany or not, you know nothing at all about this topic so spare your breath, your talking utter nonsense galore....

Originally posted by Temujin Originally posted by The Golden Phallanx Originally posted by Temujin says who? Says every german history professor. Go ask one. ect blabla in case you haven't noticed until this point...I f**king AM german, so don't tell me what Germans think about Prussia or not or how Prussia is Germany or not, you know nothing at all about this topic so spare your breath, your talking utter nonsense galore....

I think I might apologise at this point for the rather emotional outburst of my fellow country man.
If I'm not mistaken, he comes from a part of Germany that until 1871 was an independent, but also rather insignificant little kingdom in the South-West. They fought 1866 on the side of Austria against Prussia, but in 1871 got swallowed up in the newly found German Empire under Prussian domination. They lingered on till 1918, when the last king had to abdicate, and then disappeared from history.
The German unification of 1871 is still a rather touchy subject in some parts of Germany, and a kind of North-South divide between the Catholic Bavarian/Swabian South and the Protestant Prussian North still exists.
Many Southerners, like young Temujin, never forgave the Prussians for their take-over and thus can't share your enthusiasm for the great Otto.
You have to understand and forgive him.



Edited by Komnenos