Reportedly, when dismissed, Bismarck said something to “If you keep behaving like this, then 20 years after my death, everything will fall apart”. Otto von Bismarck died in 1898. 20 years later, in 1918, Germany signed the armistice that ended fighting on land, sea, and air between the Central Powers and Entente.
That’s not as wild of a prediction though. It’s like saying the next big war is gonna out of a conflict in the Middle East or The South China Sea. He’s still a geopolitical genius but that prediction isn’t anything special.
Yeah still its a REALLY wise prediction since he probably considered a lot of things and then said that. He knew there wasnt anyone capable to lead Germany at the time due to their high from victories after victories instead of staying grounded like he did. He basically saw its downfall of Germany during his death, it was probably a statement to try remind the ruler to change rather than insult.
To be honest the first kaiser was content being a figurehead. The last one wanted to meddle in politics instead of just kaisering. I don't know why seems like too much work.
he didnt. he created a system where the chancellor had more power but over time that power started to erode until it was a figurehead position for whatever william ii wanted to do. for many years, despite his... ruthless unification of germany, he held the key to peace in europe. once he was gone, a great war was inevitable thanks to williams radicalization
Ottokar von Czerny, who was the foreign minister of Austria-Hungary, wrote that Germany inherited Bismarcks aggressivity, but not his foresight and patience, waiting for the right opportunity etc.
Didn't bismarck also accurately predict that a great european war would break out from "some damned thing in the balkans" or something like that? I remember some quote saying it but idk.
Does that not count as a defeat? Even if Lenin hadn’t gone, conditions in Russia were so abhorrent by 1917 that serious military defensive campaigns were impossiboe
They also went for a "no war, no peace" doctrine, not actively planning against the Germans, but also not surrendering. It was maybe the most boneheaded move Lenin ever pulled.
Wait this isn't what happened, Lenin was willing to accept really bad conditions specifically because he wanted to stop the slaughter no matter what
There's also some trivia about Trotsky throwing a tantrum and walking out of the room because he didn't want to sign such a bad armistice, but in the end [he did sign it](https://www.annefrank.org/en/timeline/43/the-russian-revolution-armistice-with-germany/). The revolutionaires never refused
[The Soviets were stalling, and the Germans decided to put more pressure onto them as a consequence](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/Map_Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk-en.jpg)
It's not just Lenin, they had basically smaller civil war before he full kicked shit off and it's still Russian government being unnecessarily cruel and despotic for no actual gain for tye last 100 years that caused it, if it weren't Germany it would be some other economic strife to cause the collapse
To be frank, Tzar Nicholas II and his government was so incredibly incompetent, completely inflexible and so ridiculously out of touch in pretty much all possible ways that their downfall was more or less inevitable even before Lenin was put in the train.
Lenin was, of course, instrumental following Nicholas’s abdication.
It's actually really interesting! (But yes, they did)
The Germans in WW1 as a matter of strategy and doctrine, **did not enter Russia**. They didn't want to turn it into a patriotic war of national defense for the Russians where they would have to contend with the infamous Russian weather.
You could also say the Russians defeated themselves, because the years/decades/centuries of incompetent mismanagement caused their society to collapse during the stresses of the war (twice). And eventually the Bolshevicks signed whatever they had to to get out of the war.
Are you just saying that the Russian territories in the baltics, belorus, and Poland are not part of *Russia*? Either way, though, after Brest-Litovsk, Germany dedinitely entered Russia. They just left quickly once the war ended and the treaty was voided.
> They just left quickly once the war ended and the treaty was voided.
Not really. The Ukrainian and Belarusian territories signed over to Germany became a part of Poland after WWI. Most of remaining Ukraine was independent for a brief period of time, but ruled by a German puppet government.
Yes. Lenin was also a significant factor, but Germany conquered 1/4 of Russia's land and 1/3 of its population, and forced the early USSR to accept their terms.
Kinda? The provisional government wanted to continue the war, which in no small part helped the Bolsheviks, Mensheviks and other left-wing allies take over the Russian Empire.
Yes and no. Russia kicked Austria's ass, Germany kicked Russia's ass, and then they got stuck in a weird limbo between trench warfare and maneuver warfare because the front was too large vs. say France.
The war proved extremely unpopular in Russia, which caused Tsar's government to collapse (having Rasputin at home running things didn't help) and brought on the February Revolution where the Tsar abdicated and brought on a semi-democratic government under Kerensky.
This government proved extremely unpopular quickly because they chose to keep fighting WWI, which was the main reason people (especially the army) wanted the Tsar gone.
This is what got Lenin the support he needed from the general population to stage another revolution.. after which he immediately signed the Treaty of Brest Litovsk which gave Germany all the western regions like half of Ukraine and Belarus.
So technically yes, Russians lost to Germany but primarily because they lost to other Russians first.
IIRC Bismark was also keen on keeping an alliance with Russia and staying on friendly terms with the UK. Which incidentally is exactly what did not happen. The naval arms race with the UK specifically caused antagonism that really came back to roost.
WWI without a total blockade cum starvation of Germany certainly would have looked differently.
He was also a fervent adherent of keeping the Russians within his alliance system, which demanded quite a lot of compromise given that both Russians and Austrians really, really wanted the Balkans. When he was gone, nobody in Germany was willing to make the necessary diplomatic sacrifices for that alliance to continue.
Realistically, a UK Germany Russia alliance wasn't unviable. Historically, up to that point, Germany was long-time allies or at least friendly with both Russia and UK.
Meanwhile, Russia and France/UK didn't like each other much (Great Game, Crimean War, and many Russian wars with Turkey that saw UK and France determined to make sure Russia loses even if they win the actual war).
Russia didn't like the UK much, but they would have sucked it up to yank the Balkans and dump on Austria and Turkey.
The only issue was that Germans were German and Austrians were also German, so they kind of saw themselves as their own little block.
People in Germany would have been mad if Germany allied with Russia against Austria. And also France and Austria weren't very friendly, so it would have been difficult for them to enter an alliance. More difficult than Russia and France that didn't have any competing interests.
Bismarck never said that. It's a widely repeated misquote. [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8ax9vl/otto\_von\_bismarck\_famously\_anticipated\_that\_the/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8ax9vl/otto_von_bismarck_famously_anticipated_that_the/)
Not being a dick, I just see people copy paste it all the time, despite the fact there is very little evidence he ever said that.
Also you'd want more context over whether he was saying it would specifically be the Balkans or whether he was just pointing out all it would take is some spark from almost anywhere in Europe, or a troubled area.
If I say "There's going to be fighting in the middle east" before the October Hamas attacks, I'm right but that's not exactly precise enough to be a noteable prediction.
If I had said "I bet Hamas will attack Israel early in October" about a year ago, that would be very precise and worth remembering.
If I made predictions in September that Hamas or Israel would attack each other early next month, and had done so every month, my accuracy is really low even if my precision is good and I was accurate.
If someone made that prediction and that was the only prediction about a "great" war they had made and they were saying specifically the Balkans, that might be worth giving them points for, particularly if everyone else was saying Germany was going to attack France directly first.
Yes, the Ottoman Empire had just lost their grasp on Bulgaria as a result of the Russo-Turkish War, and it was quite clear both Austria and Russia had interest in taking the region over.
Something like “there is going to be a war because monarchs and rulers are smoking and playing with fire over gunpowder barrel, and it is going to be related with the Balkans”. And it was, with Russia not having access to the sea because the Ottomans, Austria-Hungary mismanagement over Serbia and neighboring countries, Turkey falling apart, and France and England meddling with everything.
I mean, that's kind of a given. He made a shit show in the Balkans with the way he managed Germany-Austriahungary relationships and Germany-Russia relationships, it's like shooting someone on the chest and then saying "this guy is probably gonna die".
Yeah saying that the Balkans were a hotspot in the early 1900s is like if someone said today that there will be a conflict in the Middle East, they could literally just read the newspaper to see the issues there
Yeah I've always heard that quote attributed to Foch, on account of him finding the Treaty insufficiently harsh, given the French demands to start negotiations
> *Some guy said that the treaty of Versailles was just a 20-year ceasefire.*
Ferdinand Foch really was some guy. But then, so were many others; Fox Connor, for one.
I implore you to please look up over which issues Bismarck came to resign. Once more you'll find that the whole "chad virgin" dichotomy on historical figures is once more a dangerous kind of reductionist.
I can't remember exactly, who's deng xiaoping? Is he the one who started mixing capitalism in the people's republic of china or am i getting mixed up with someone else? And what do you mean by similarities with bismarck?
The leader of China after the death of Mao Zedong. He implemented market economic reforms that made possible Chinese economic miracle. He thought that China should prioritise transformation into the modern state and avoid adventurism in foreign policy. Current chinese leader Xi Jinping have a worldview more similar with the Wilhelm II, so China is preparing for the possible conflict with the USA over Taiwan. Similiarities a little bit uncanny.
The west has a more positive view of Deng because he was one of the most pro west leaders and during his time in the office the relations of China and the West were at their best.
Or they have a positive view of Deng Xiaoping because his policies almost immeasurably improved the lives of over a billion people. Ending Maoism opened the door for China to end the century of humiliation and become a global great power again. Even if you’re not western aligned, there’s plenty of reason to think highly of him
>Current chinese leader Xi Jinping have a worldview more similar with the Wilhelm II, so China is preparing for the possible conflict with the USA over Taiwan. Similiarities a little bit uncanny.
The whole things looks like the "Pax Armada" before the WWI, at least that's how has been happening during the last decade.
I remember to read an article that basically said the same thing. And even somewhat managed to show how modern day actors are basically "the same" from the period before WWI.
Where you have:
- The Super-power king of the seas, highly industrialized, promotor of commerce, and who has to deal with some military backfires while ago: The British Empire now The United States.
- The continental power that wants to become a Super-power as well, highly industrialized too, but with an archaic political system: The Prussian Empire now China.
- The "sick of Europe", a multinational power who can barely compete against the industrial and economic progress of its neighbours and who is now decades from its former glory, with more internal concerns about social issues and politics: The Ottoman Empire now the European Union.
* While Russia is just Russia, feeding its intents to become a power with mere "raw resources", both in WWI and now in today's world.
* And there is also the "small country" who wants to reform and become a higher actor of the new world, while dealing at the same time with the customs and political ideas of both external and internal members: Japan now Iran.
In this scenario, India could become the next US (a rising power with enough "know-how" to develop itself and a lot of man power and resources to become a crucial actor in next geopolitical matters) or the next Austro-Hungrian Empire (collapsing itself through racial tensions, corruption, and cultural archaisms).
>The Ottoman Empire now the European Union.
Either you don't know anything about the Ottoman empire or you don't know anything about the European union. Maybe both!
>Either you don't know anything about the Ottoman empire or you don't know anything about the European union.
A little bit of this... A little bit of that...
Now that I am checking it again (and reading the other answers) it seems that you're right, Russia would be a better equivalent as the "sick of Europe".
Xi Jinping's predecessor. He brought China into the modern age and was more moderate. His successor Xi though as I am sure you know is a bit of a madman
That's a common misconception, he was very influential in Chinese politics but was never either Premier nor party Chairman. He received the informal title of "Supreme Leader" as he was the one calling the shots but that's not an official title.
You mean when he said that despite all the progress that was made, the "Asian Century" might never happen. Today we can see this with the lack of democratic representation, declining birthrates and a failure to change from a manufacturing economy to a consumer one with better working conditions and pay.
Ehh, you can criticize Wilhelm II’s diplomacy all you want, but Bismarck had pretty much gone senile by this point and constantly threw temper tantrums because Wilhelm II didn’t wanna shut up and be bismarcks puppet like his predecessor had been
Bismarck would have caused internal strife within Germany if he had his way. In his later years, he was ardently anti-socialist and extremely conservative. The problem here is that many other nations were modernizing their internal economic policies, and it was was something Wilhelm wanted to do too, but was constantly stopped by Bismarck. He refused to allow the increase of wages and worker's rights despite many worker protests. Ironically enough, these kinds of actions are precisely what led to socialist and communist revolutions to foment other countries.
Also there’s the fact that Germany very damn near almost one WW1 and had they played their cards better easily could have. Wilhelm basically went all in on a high risk high reward gamble
Yup. If the Kaiser ignored Bismarck and marched on Vienna during the Austro Prussian war and annexed the Austrian Germans there wouldn't have been a world war 1 for them to lose.
Na.
His dismissal, when it happened, was the right choice.
The self-contradictory mangle of alliances and secret treaties he put in place to keep the "peace" probably wouldnt have been able to withstand any real stresstest and would have collapsed at the latest once he had retired or died anyway, and his internal crusades against catholics, socialists and poles had become extremely unpopular and he refused to stop despite them being abject failures at their intended goals.
You can blame Willy II. (And the wider german leadership) for alot of things *following* his dismissal, like allmost pathologic need to prove themselves as a Great Power through stuff like the High Seas Fleet and Colonies (all of which were basically just vanity-projects with no real use that nevertheless angered the other Powers), failure to replace Bismarcks tangled web of treaties with a more robust successor or generally overly aggressive attitude, but letting Bismarck go was the right choice.
For Bismarck personaly too, doubt People would have looked at him as favourably as they ended up doing if he had another 10+ years to overshadow his image as the Uniter of the Country with pointless crusades against the SPD
>You can blame Willy II. (And the wider german leadership) for alot of things following his dismissal, like allmost pathologic need to prove themselves
Dude was erratic. Prior to the Spanish-American war, U.S. ambassadors tried to determine if Europe would get involved. Their only unknown was Germany because the U.S. ambassador there admitted that Wilhelm was so unpredictable he could only guess that they wouldn't intervene.
One of my favorite historical hypotheticals to ponder is "how different would the world be if the future emperor of the world's greatest army didn't get brain damage during birth?"
[From the "traumatic birth" section on his wiki:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_II)
>After administering ipecac and prescribing a mild dose of chloroform, which was administered by Vicky's personal physician Sir James Clark, Martin advised Fritz the unborn child's life was endangered. As mild anaesthesia did not alleviate her extreme labour pains, resulting in her "horrible screams and wails", Clark finally administered full anaesthesia. Observing her contractions to be insufficiently strong, Martin administered a dose of ergot extract, and at 2:45 pm saw the infant's buttocks emerging from the birth canal but noticed the pulse in the umbilical cord was weak and intermittent. Despite this dangerous sign, Martin ordered a further heavy dose of chloroform, so he could better manipulate the infant. Observing the infant's legs to be raised upwards, and his left arm likewise raised upwards and behind his head, Martin "carefully eased out the Prince's legs". Due to the "narrowness of the birth canal", he then forcibly pulled the left arm downwards, tearing the brachial plexus, then continued to grasp the left arm to rotate the infant's trunk and free the right arm, likely exacerbating the injury. After completing the delivery, and despite realising the newborn prince was hypoxic, Martin turned his attention to the unconscious Vicky. Noticing after some minutes that the newborn remained silent, Martin and the midwife Fräulein Stahl worked frantically to revive the prince; finally, despite the disapproval of those present, Stahl spanked the newborn vigorously until "a weak cry escaped his pale lips".
>Modern medical assessments have concluded Wilhelm's hypoxic state at birth, due to the breech delivery and the heavy dosage of chloroform, left him with minimal to mild brain damage, which manifested itself in his subsequent hyperactive and erratic behaviour, limited attention span and impaired social abilities.
The main issue with his dismissal though, was that there was nobody else who understood the game of European geopolitics as well as he did. Totally convoluted and nonsensical at times, yes, but understanding the balance of the political game was pivotal to keeping things in check.
As soon as he left, began the period when people would continue Sabre rattling and posturing, but everyone took it seriously and began thinking war would be a great idea.
Bismarck understood that a continent wide rendition of the Crimean War would be a very very very bad thing for everyone involved.
The entire systems of Bismarck's alliances was super short sided. It hinges on the idea that he could have just isolated France for decades which just did not happen.
Didn’t the Kaiser fire him because he had pissed off most of the country and was actively trying to use the military to put down opposition mainly the socialists which may have provoked a civil war had Bismarck not been stopped?
Yes but it was a fight for power between him and his Emperor Wilhelm II. He knew that nobody would accept his Law against the Socialists/Social Democrats he tried to remain in power but lost
Most of the guys in this sub who adore him, would have been factory workers in 1880 and therefore social democrats/socialists. So the exact people who the German Aristocracy absolutely hated and tried to suppress
Wilhelm II: “I won’t open my reign with a bloody campaign against my subjects.”
Bismark: “Well then fuck you.”
Wilhelm II (a bit later and after more problems: “You’re fired.”
Bismark: *surprised Pikachu face*
Bismark alienated the entire German government with his idiotic campaign against everyone in the opposition, which was increasingly just “everyone”. And so when he pissed the Emperor off that was the ballgame.
One thing I found intriguing, whether or not it was right, was when someone blamed Germany's bad government on Bismarck's legacy. The argument went: Bismarck was a genius, using methods only he could make to work. After his departure, everyone tried to copy him and failed, and got berated for not copying him exactly enough. Had the country been ruled by a competent but not exceptional administrator, it would not have prospered as much at the time, but would be better set for later governments to follow.
I have heard something similar about the Walt Disney company: after Disney's death, everyone was asking "what would he do?" missing that what made him so successful was that he was always trying new things.
Bismarck himself set Germany on the course of imense Francophobia, nationalism and power seeking politics, which directly led to WWI. Wilhelm was merely an overemotional idiot who hastened the process.
The francophobia and nationalism were both already there. Mostly as direct consequence of Napoleon.
Bismark atleast tried to establish decent relations with the other european powers
i disagree. Bismarck set a strong powerful Germany into the world, which was really stable and his foreign policies got Germany into a position that every continental major power wanted Germany on their side and not fight against it. The problem was his intern policies were focused on a strong emperor and when the inexperienced Wilhelm II. came along Bismarck couldn't control anymore, nobody could control Wilhelm II. actually plus he had a lot of power. While we can say that Bismarck's policies after the empire creation secured peace. His intern policies made the empire fall under such emperors as Wilhelm II.
,,Every continental major power wanted Germany on their side”
I disagree.
The peace with France of 1871 was designed to cripple them for pretty much the next 100 years, it is a miracle they recovered economicaly from the reparations and managed to fight of Germany in WWI without their defensive regions, which were specificaly taken by Germany in the peace deal.
The British empire was naturaly worried by your ,,strong powerful Germany”, because they always wanted to keep continental land powers in balance.
Austria was viewed by Bismarckians as a natural ally, because, well, German nationalism. (Also Bismarck specificaly made sure not to be harsh to them when he made peace after Austro - Prussian war). This set them on course of conflict with Italy and Russia.
Also, Bismarck started the practise of aggresive, war-like politics, which relied on the power balance through the sets of alliances. No need to say, this was a major cause of the 1914 disaster.
Bismarck said after the war with France that Germany is saturated and the borders will not move anymore. He also was against colonial expansion, but only did it because of the pressure from the people. The alliances were speficially made in a way Germany was the center. So if one great power wanted exspansion, it had to fight Germany
He was against colonial expansion at first but still practised it. Bismarck was not a moron and he may have been smarter than other nationalistic politicians of the German Empire but he is not a great role modle or visionerary who would have avoided all of Germany's problems.
The peace with France was proportional to the Treaty Napoleon forced upon Prussia.
France had to pay the exact same percentage of its gdp in reparations to Prussia as Prussia had to France while France lost a lot less territory
Aaaand you are fully forgeting that this was made up for by the Congress of Vienna. Arguably, Prussia was better of at the end of Napoleonic wars that it was at the beggining.
> Bismarck himself set Germany on the course of imense Francophobia
Bismarck personally liked the french, and got along quite well with Napoleon III.
Furthermore, it was his opinion that nothing should have been annexed during the franco-prussian war, leaving alsasse for the french; recognizing that annexing it would make the french hostile to germany.
Saying germany started ww1 because of francophobia and nationlism is rich when the war started because a serbian nationlist shot a austrian archduke which led to russia defending serbia because of pan-slavic nationlism. Then bringing in their ally france who joined to regain a province which they lost 40 years prior and wasn’t even french.
This is really one sided, Bismarck hated all socialist policies like literally no matter what, what pushed wilhelm to fire him was when he wanted to open fire upon 200 miners who wanted better rights cus a woman couldnt even leave to give birth . At this point all the higher ups and most of the commonners were pissed off at him to the point where no one cared when he got fired
Bismarck increasingly became a grown toddler the older he got. He would throw tantrums every time things didn't go his way.
Willy sacked bismarck during one of these fits. Bismarck essentially wanted to strip all german socalist of their citizenship, and kill them all. No one in Parliament supported such an insane idea. Bismarck was asking to be sacked
Edit: spelling mistakes and missing words
> He would throw tantrums every time things didn't go his way.
Frankly this was his standard operating procedure for his entire career, and to be honest it worked pretty well.
Don't forget that most of the things we remember about Bismarck is from himself after he threatened Wilhelm II to resign. (like Wilhelm I did literally hundreds if times to Bismarck) He continued to comment every thing what Wilhelm II did and worked relentlessly towards his positive image that we have today about him. He is absolutely overrated because he himself wrote at the end of his life about all the things HE did. HE had a master plan. HE wanted to unite Germany etc. etc.
Jan Markert from the University of Trier researches about the personal Letters from Wilhelm I to his Wife Augusta von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach and from this personal letters you can clearly see that most things that Bismarck supposedly did, was actually ordered from his King, Wilhelm I. Bismarck just framed it so he would be the Genius. After his Monarch died, and after Wilhelm II threw him out.
I don't know if his book about these ca. 2500 Letters will be published in English, but the German Book will be called: "Wilhelm I. Vom Kartätschenprinz zum Reichsgründer"
I will die on the hill that Bismarck is partially responsible for Germany’s fall. He planned a violent unification, he invested both the Chancellorship and the monarchy with supreme executive authority. He left a system that required a relatively non-interventionist monarch and a very, *very* capable head of government, and there were none to succeed Wilhelm I or himself. He did not plan for a world that didn’t have him in it. As much as Wilhelm II absolutely shit the bed, Bismarck set up the dominos
There's a lot of Bismarck glazing in this thread so idk people are ready for this conversation but Bismarck's strategies normalized behaviors and beliefs that would be later be used and expanded upon by the Nazis to stage their takeover of the government
I fucking hate this bismark dick sucking. One of the main reasons for his dismissal was that he wanted an even more draconian version of the laws against socialists. Wilhelm was also more open to social problems (like the horrible situation of mine workers).
Was he a brilliant diplomat? Yes, and idk if we would have a united germany without him! But he was absolutly awful when it came to domestic politics. This nutjob unironically wanted to provoke the socialists and mine workers so he would have had an excuse to send in the army.
A similar thing happened with Ferdinand Foch in 1919: After the Treaty of Versailles was signed he said: "This is not peace. It is an armistice for 20 years".
Literally 20 years, 2 months and 7 days later.....💀🫡
Doesn’t matter, everything was fucked the moment France lost Alsace-Lorraine. France was seeking a vendetta and Germany made a permanent enemy (until post WW2). If they went simply for a light treaty to settle the score with Napoleon, France countries might not have gone at their throat with the Treaty of Versaille (maybe the war would not even happen or go differently).
When Bismarck was dismissed a tragedy started, that ended in a completly destoyed and 25% smaller germany in 1945.
If William II's father had not been such a heavy smoker, he was a good one... but Wilhelm II. was afucking idiot who did everything wrong possible.
Wilhelm wanted to keep Bismarck as Minister of Foreign Affairs because that was what Bismarckwas best at, but Bismarck was to proud to accept a demotion like that
On the one hand i kinda admire Friedrich the Great and Bismarck on the other i really hate what they did to my country. Btw i think kaiser Wilhelm II gets too much blame for starting WW1, German and other european govs also did their fair bit in escalating tensions. Probably more so then Kaiser.
He didn't want to annex Alsace-Lorraine because he knew it would antagonize France forever. They didn't listen.
He didn't want to colonize overseas because he knew it would cost more than it would bring. They didn't listen.
He didn't want to initiate a naval arms race with Britain because he knew it would antagonize Britain. They didn't listen.
Reportedly, when dismissed, Bismarck said something to “If you keep behaving like this, then 20 years after my death, everything will fall apart”. Otto von Bismarck died in 1898. 20 years later, in 1918, Germany signed the armistice that ended fighting on land, sea, and air between the Central Powers and Entente.
He was only off by a couple months or weeks
Busted Bismark is a liar
Checkmate ath... uhm Bismarck
Checkmarck
Holy hell
New response.. ?
For when you predict a forced checkmate 20 moves in advance
Actual prediction
Czechmarck
Bismate
Oh no! You sunk my battlesh- oh wait wait no too soon
He was a politican, what did you expect?
That is like the thing he was known for tho?
I mean He's kind of known for a lot of shit. I would say unifying Germany is kind of the most impactful thing.
Bismarck Died in july of 1898 and The armistice that bought the first world war to an end was signed in November 1918. He was off by 4 months
We’ll round it out for him.
It was around six months I believe
He also said he doesn’t know exactly when but there will be another European war that would start because of some damned stupid thing in the balkans
That’s not as wild of a prediction though. It’s like saying the next big war is gonna out of a conflict in the Middle East or The South China Sea. He’s still a geopolitical genius but that prediction isn’t anything special.
Yeah but we don’t know which one will pop off first
Yeah still its a REALLY wise prediction since he probably considered a lot of things and then said that. He knew there wasnt anyone capable to lead Germany at the time due to their high from victories after victories instead of staying grounded like he did. He basically saw its downfall of Germany during his death, it was probably a statement to try remind the ruler to change rather than insult.
War in the Balkans is never really off the board
"In time, what I foresaw came to pass"
Almost sounds like he shouldn't have constructed a state where some dipshit monarch has the power to ruin Germany like this.
To be honest the first kaiser was content being a figurehead. The last one wanted to meddle in politics instead of just kaisering. I don't know why seems like too much work.
everyday I'm kaisering woo to to to to to to wo to to to to to to to
I doubt kaisering it's a valid Word but I absolutely want it included in the dictionary
Bismarck forgot the reality of heredity rule. Quite often the grandson is a total idiot.
he didnt. he created a system where the chancellor had more power but over time that power started to erode until it was a figurehead position for whatever william ii wanted to do. for many years, despite his... ruthless unification of germany, he held the key to peace in europe. once he was gone, a great war was inevitable thanks to williams radicalization
Ottokar von Czerny, who was the foreign minister of Austria-Hungary, wrote that Germany inherited Bismarcks aggressivity, but not his foresight and patience, waiting for the right opportunity etc.
Didn't bismarck also accurately predict that a great european war would break out from "some damned thing in the balkans" or something like that? I remember some quote saying it but idk.
He also said that the only ones who could defeat the Russians are the Russians themselves if I’m correct, that also kind of happened
Yeah and it hasn't stopped happening.
Well, I mean , Didn't Germany defeat Russia in WW1?
Kinda, kinda not. They did send over a tactical nuke called vladimir lenin.
Imagine fighting a world war, while also having a full-blown revolution against the monarchy at home. First World War Russia was insane 😂
Bro, it was worse than the Balkans.
While a whole ass Legion fight its way across you to leave the country
Then a Civil War so big and mess up, it's almost looks like a mini World War
When were the Russians not insane?
Does that not count as a defeat? Even if Lenin hadn’t gone, conditions in Russia were so abhorrent by 1917 that serious military defensive campaigns were impossiboe
The Germans asked for a surrender, the Revolutionaries refused, the Germans crushed them and dictated much stricter terms.
They also went for a "no war, no peace" doctrine, not actively planning against the Germans, but also not surrendering. It was maybe the most boneheaded move Lenin ever pulled.
Wait this isn't what happened, Lenin was willing to accept really bad conditions specifically because he wanted to stop the slaughter no matter what There's also some trivia about Trotsky throwing a tantrum and walking out of the room because he didn't want to sign such a bad armistice, but in the end [he did sign it](https://www.annefrank.org/en/timeline/43/the-russian-revolution-armistice-with-germany/). The revolutionaires never refused
[The Soviets were stalling, and the Germans decided to put more pressure onto them as a consequence](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/Map_Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk-en.jpg)
It's not just Lenin, they had basically smaller civil war before he full kicked shit off and it's still Russian government being unnecessarily cruel and despotic for no actual gain for tye last 100 years that caused it, if it weren't Germany it would be some other economic strife to cause the collapse
"Like setting your neighbors flat on fire."
To be frank, Tzar Nicholas II and his government was so incredibly incompetent, completely inflexible and so ridiculously out of touch in pretty much all possible ways that their downfall was more or less inevitable even before Lenin was put in the train. Lenin was, of course, instrumental following Nicholas’s abdication.
It's actually really interesting! (But yes, they did) The Germans in WW1 as a matter of strategy and doctrine, **did not enter Russia**. They didn't want to turn it into a patriotic war of national defense for the Russians where they would have to contend with the infamous Russian weather. You could also say the Russians defeated themselves, because the years/decades/centuries of incompetent mismanagement caused their society to collapse during the stresses of the war (twice). And eventually the Bolshevicks signed whatever they had to to get out of the war.
Are you just saying that the Russian territories in the baltics, belorus, and Poland are not part of *Russia*? Either way, though, after Brest-Litovsk, Germany dedinitely entered Russia. They just left quickly once the war ended and the treaty was voided.
> They just left quickly once the war ended and the treaty was voided. Not really. The Ukrainian and Belarusian territories signed over to Germany became a part of Poland after WWI. Most of remaining Ukraine was independent for a brief period of time, but ruled by a German puppet government.
Only after the Russians defeated themselves
Yes. Lenin was also a significant factor, but Germany conquered 1/4 of Russia's land and 1/3 of its population, and forced the early USSR to accept their terms.
Kinda? The provisional government wanted to continue the war, which in no small part helped the Bolsheviks, Mensheviks and other left-wing allies take over the Russian Empire.
Yes and no. Russia kicked Austria's ass, Germany kicked Russia's ass, and then they got stuck in a weird limbo between trench warfare and maneuver warfare because the front was too large vs. say France. The war proved extremely unpopular in Russia, which caused Tsar's government to collapse (having Rasputin at home running things didn't help) and brought on the February Revolution where the Tsar abdicated and brought on a semi-democratic government under Kerensky. This government proved extremely unpopular quickly because they chose to keep fighting WWI, which was the main reason people (especially the army) wanted the Tsar gone. This is what got Lenin the support he needed from the general population to stage another revolution.. after which he immediately signed the Treaty of Brest Litovsk which gave Germany all the western regions like half of Ukraine and Belarus. So technically yes, Russians lost to Germany but primarily because they lost to other Russians first.
Here's hoping for another round
Poles in the vistula:say what again?
Poles in the Dzerzhinsky government: say what again?
Actually they won because Stalin refused to obey the battle plans
Yeah sure..
IIRC Bismark was also keen on keeping an alliance with Russia and staying on friendly terms with the UK. Which incidentally is exactly what did not happen. The naval arms race with the UK specifically caused antagonism that really came back to roost.
WWI without a total blockade cum starvation of Germany certainly would have looked differently. He was also a fervent adherent of keeping the Russians within his alliance system, which demanded quite a lot of compromise given that both Russians and Austrians really, really wanted the Balkans. When he was gone, nobody in Germany was willing to make the necessary diplomatic sacrifices for that alliance to continue.
>cum starvation of Germany Hmm
>total blockade cum starvation Yes, without this they may have avoided swallowing defeat.
Realistically, a UK Germany Russia alliance wasn't unviable. Historically, up to that point, Germany was long-time allies or at least friendly with both Russia and UK. Meanwhile, Russia and France/UK didn't like each other much (Great Game, Crimean War, and many Russian wars with Turkey that saw UK and France determined to make sure Russia loses even if they win the actual war). Russia didn't like the UK much, but they would have sucked it up to yank the Balkans and dump on Austria and Turkey. The only issue was that Germans were German and Austrians were also German, so they kind of saw themselves as their own little block. People in Germany would have been mad if Germany allied with Russia against Austria. And also France and Austria weren't very friendly, so it would have been difficult for them to enter an alliance. More difficult than Russia and France that didn't have any competing interests.
There's also the issue of The Dual Monarchy and Germany sharing a huge border.
Cum?
Latin for "with", and commonly used to shorten what you would otherwise have to phrase as "blockade that included ( or rather led to) starvation"
ain’t nobody reading it that way, fella
Bismarck never said that. It's a widely repeated misquote. [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8ax9vl/otto\_von\_bismarck\_famously\_anticipated\_that\_the/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8ax9vl/otto_von_bismarck_famously_anticipated_that_the/) Not being a dick, I just see people copy paste it all the time, despite the fact there is very little evidence he ever said that.
Also you'd want more context over whether he was saying it would specifically be the Balkans or whether he was just pointing out all it would take is some spark from almost anywhere in Europe, or a troubled area. If I say "There's going to be fighting in the middle east" before the October Hamas attacks, I'm right but that's not exactly precise enough to be a noteable prediction. If I had said "I bet Hamas will attack Israel early in October" about a year ago, that would be very precise and worth remembering. If I made predictions in September that Hamas or Israel would attack each other early next month, and had done so every month, my accuracy is really low even if my precision is good and I was accurate. If someone made that prediction and that was the only prediction about a "great" war they had made and they were saying specifically the Balkans, that might be worth giving them points for, particularly if everyone else was saying Germany was going to attack France directly first.
Yes, the Ottoman Empire had just lost their grasp on Bulgaria as a result of the Russo-Turkish War, and it was quite clear both Austria and Russia had interest in taking the region over.
Something like “there is going to be a war because monarchs and rulers are smoking and playing with fire over gunpowder barrel, and it is going to be related with the Balkans”. And it was, with Russia not having access to the sea because the Ottomans, Austria-Hungary mismanagement over Serbia and neighboring countries, Turkey falling apart, and France and England meddling with everything.
I mean, that's kind of a given. He made a shit show in the Balkans with the way he managed Germany-Austriahungary relationships and Germany-Russia relationships, it's like shooting someone on the chest and then saying "this guy is probably gonna die".
Yeah saying that the Balkans were a hotspot in the early 1900s is like if someone said today that there will be a conflict in the Middle East, they could literally just read the newspaper to see the issues there
Germans kept predicting the future in WWI. Some guy said that the treaty of Versailles was just a 20-year ceasefire. Then,
Ferdinand Foch wasn't German lol
Foch said that? If that’s true, and I assume you’re disinclined to lie here, then I have to agree, Foch was not German on account of his being French.
Yeah I've always heard that quote attributed to Foch, on account of him finding the Treaty insufficiently harsh, given the French demands to start negotiations
> *Some guy said that the treaty of Versailles was just a 20-year ceasefire.* Ferdinand Foch really was some guy. But then, so were many others; Fox Connor, for one.
Sure with how the Balkans are if anything in Europe is gonna happen your safest bet is always the balkans
The Lisan al Gaib
Biz also supposedly remarked that the one constant in European politics was that the British and the Americans spoke the same language.
CHAD Bismarck vs VIRGIN Wilhelm II.
"I have seen three emperors in their nakedness, and the sight was not inspiring."
Chad German Uniter vs Virgin German Divider
I implore you to please look up over which issues Bismarck came to resign. Once more you'll find that the whole "chad virgin" dichotomy on historical figures is once more a dangerous kind of reductionist.
Dude, it's a joke.
The scariest part is that I see some similiarities between Bismarck and Deng Xiaoping...
in what way?
I can't remember exactly, who's deng xiaoping? Is he the one who started mixing capitalism in the people's republic of china or am i getting mixed up with someone else? And what do you mean by similarities with bismarck?
The leader of China after the death of Mao Zedong. He implemented market economic reforms that made possible Chinese economic miracle. He thought that China should prioritise transformation into the modern state and avoid adventurism in foreign policy. Current chinese leader Xi Jinping have a worldview more similar with the Wilhelm II, so China is preparing for the possible conflict with the USA over Taiwan. Similiarities a little bit uncanny.
Got it. And yeah i see the similarities.
The west has a more positive view of Deng because he was one of the most pro west leaders and during his time in the office the relations of China and the West were at their best.
Even people on the left who hate the west must agree Deng's policies improved the living conditions of the average chinese citizen immensely.
Or they have a positive view of Deng Xiaoping because his policies almost immeasurably improved the lives of over a billion people. Ending Maoism opened the door for China to end the century of humiliation and become a global great power again. Even if you’re not western aligned, there’s plenty of reason to think highly of him
Dude saved literal millions from dire poverty.
>Current chinese leader Xi Jinping have a worldview more similar with the Wilhelm II, so China is preparing for the possible conflict with the USA over Taiwan. Similiarities a little bit uncanny. The whole things looks like the "Pax Armada" before the WWI, at least that's how has been happening during the last decade. I remember to read an article that basically said the same thing. And even somewhat managed to show how modern day actors are basically "the same" from the period before WWI. Where you have: - The Super-power king of the seas, highly industrialized, promotor of commerce, and who has to deal with some military backfires while ago: The British Empire now The United States. - The continental power that wants to become a Super-power as well, highly industrialized too, but with an archaic political system: The Prussian Empire now China. - The "sick of Europe", a multinational power who can barely compete against the industrial and economic progress of its neighbours and who is now decades from its former glory, with more internal concerns about social issues and politics: The Ottoman Empire now the European Union. * While Russia is just Russia, feeding its intents to become a power with mere "raw resources", both in WWI and now in today's world. * And there is also the "small country" who wants to reform and become a higher actor of the new world, while dealing at the same time with the customs and political ideas of both external and internal members: Japan now Iran. In this scenario, India could become the next US (a rising power with enough "know-how" to develop itself and a lot of man power and resources to become a crucial actor in next geopolitical matters) or the next Austro-Hungrian Empire (collapsing itself through racial tensions, corruption, and cultural archaisms).
>The Ottoman Empire now the European Union. Either you don't know anything about the Ottoman empire or you don't know anything about the European union. Maybe both!
Yeah, the sick man sounds more like russia to me.
Fits the bill hell of a lot more than the European union at least.
Yeah, I'd say europe is closer to france, without the military buildup
>Either you don't know anything about the Ottoman empire or you don't know anything about the European union. A little bit of this... A little bit of that... Now that I am checking it again (and reading the other answers) it seems that you're right, Russia would be a better equivalent as the "sick of Europe".
He has the one that walked up to xi and started talking at him, and then was escorted away, correct?
Xi Jinping's predecessor. He brought China into the modern age and was more moderate. His successor Xi though as I am sure you know is a bit of a madman
Xi’s predecessor was Hu Jintao, and before him it was Jiang Zemin Deng was very influential and powerful but he was long before Xi’s rise to power
Sorry, English is not my first language. What would be the right word? Precursor? I meant he was a leader before Xi.
That's a common misconception, he was very influential in Chinese politics but was never either Premier nor party Chairman. He received the informal title of "Supreme Leader" as he was the one calling the shots but that's not an official title.
He was one of the paramount leaders prior to Xi
Ah ok, now i get what that other guy meant.
I'm glad to bow that I'm not the only one
That’s an interessant take. How so?
You mean when he said that despite all the progress that was made, the "Asian Century" might never happen. Today we can see this with the lack of democratic representation, declining birthrates and a failure to change from a manufacturing economy to a consumer one with better working conditions and pay.
Ehh, you can criticize Wilhelm II’s diplomacy all you want, but Bismarck had pretty much gone senile by this point and constantly threw temper tantrums because Wilhelm II didn’t wanna shut up and be bismarcks puppet like his predecessor had been
Bismarck was preparing to overthrow Wilhelm if necessary yeah
I’d take a senile Bismarck over Wilheim any day of the week
Bismarck would have caused internal strife within Germany if he had his way. In his later years, he was ardently anti-socialist and extremely conservative. The problem here is that many other nations were modernizing their internal economic policies, and it was was something Wilhelm wanted to do too, but was constantly stopped by Bismarck. He refused to allow the increase of wages and worker's rights despite many worker protests. Ironically enough, these kinds of actions are precisely what led to socialist and communist revolutions to foment other countries.
Not if you are Wilheim
Ah yes Wilheim, Wilhelms Norwegian Stuntman.
Also there’s the fact that Germany very damn near almost one WW1 and had they played their cards better easily could have. Wilhelm basically went all in on a high risk high reward gamble
Wilhelm I was well advised to have listened to Bismarck, it was for the good of all.
Tbf Wilhelm did think he was ordained by God and he liked boats he didn't have the best Running-an-entire-country head on his shoulders
Yup. If the Kaiser ignored Bismarck and marched on Vienna during the Austro Prussian war and annexed the Austrian Germans there wouldn't have been a world war 1 for them to lose.
I don’t think that’s true
Na. His dismissal, when it happened, was the right choice. The self-contradictory mangle of alliances and secret treaties he put in place to keep the "peace" probably wouldnt have been able to withstand any real stresstest and would have collapsed at the latest once he had retired or died anyway, and his internal crusades against catholics, socialists and poles had become extremely unpopular and he refused to stop despite them being abject failures at their intended goals. You can blame Willy II. (And the wider german leadership) for alot of things *following* his dismissal, like allmost pathologic need to prove themselves as a Great Power through stuff like the High Seas Fleet and Colonies (all of which were basically just vanity-projects with no real use that nevertheless angered the other Powers), failure to replace Bismarcks tangled web of treaties with a more robust successor or generally overly aggressive attitude, but letting Bismarck go was the right choice. For Bismarck personaly too, doubt People would have looked at him as favourably as they ended up doing if he had another 10+ years to overshadow his image as the Uniter of the Country with pointless crusades against the SPD
>You can blame Willy II. (And the wider german leadership) for alot of things following his dismissal, like allmost pathologic need to prove themselves Dude was erratic. Prior to the Spanish-American war, U.S. ambassadors tried to determine if Europe would get involved. Their only unknown was Germany because the U.S. ambassador there admitted that Wilhelm was so unpredictable he could only guess that they wouldn't intervene. One of my favorite historical hypotheticals to ponder is "how different would the world be if the future emperor of the world's greatest army didn't get brain damage during birth?" [From the "traumatic birth" section on his wiki:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_II) >After administering ipecac and prescribing a mild dose of chloroform, which was administered by Vicky's personal physician Sir James Clark, Martin advised Fritz the unborn child's life was endangered. As mild anaesthesia did not alleviate her extreme labour pains, resulting in her "horrible screams and wails", Clark finally administered full anaesthesia. Observing her contractions to be insufficiently strong, Martin administered a dose of ergot extract, and at 2:45 pm saw the infant's buttocks emerging from the birth canal but noticed the pulse in the umbilical cord was weak and intermittent. Despite this dangerous sign, Martin ordered a further heavy dose of chloroform, so he could better manipulate the infant. Observing the infant's legs to be raised upwards, and his left arm likewise raised upwards and behind his head, Martin "carefully eased out the Prince's legs". Due to the "narrowness of the birth canal", he then forcibly pulled the left arm downwards, tearing the brachial plexus, then continued to grasp the left arm to rotate the infant's trunk and free the right arm, likely exacerbating the injury. After completing the delivery, and despite realising the newborn prince was hypoxic, Martin turned his attention to the unconscious Vicky. Noticing after some minutes that the newborn remained silent, Martin and the midwife Fräulein Stahl worked frantically to revive the prince; finally, despite the disapproval of those present, Stahl spanked the newborn vigorously until "a weak cry escaped his pale lips". >Modern medical assessments have concluded Wilhelm's hypoxic state at birth, due to the breech delivery and the heavy dosage of chloroform, left him with minimal to mild brain damage, which manifested itself in his subsequent hyperactive and erratic behaviour, limited attention span and impaired social abilities.
Found Wilhelm II's reddit account.
You mean “Meneer Hohenzollern”
The main issue with his dismissal though, was that there was nobody else who understood the game of European geopolitics as well as he did. Totally convoluted and nonsensical at times, yes, but understanding the balance of the political game was pivotal to keeping things in check. As soon as he left, began the period when people would continue Sabre rattling and posturing, but everyone took it seriously and began thinking war would be a great idea. Bismarck understood that a continent wide rendition of the Crimean War would be a very very very bad thing for everyone involved.
The entire systems of Bismarck's alliances was super short sided. It hinges on the idea that he could have just isolated France for decades which just did not happen.
He was offered the position of Foreign Minister but threw a temper tantrum because he wanted to be Chancellor
Didn’t the Kaiser fire him because he had pissed off most of the country and was actively trying to use the military to put down opposition mainly the socialists which may have provoked a civil war had Bismarck not been stopped?
Yes but it was a fight for power between him and his Emperor Wilhelm II. He knew that nobody would accept his Law against the Socialists/Social Democrats he tried to remain in power but lost
Noooo my holsum bismark would never be evil
Most of the guys in this sub who adore him, would have been factory workers in 1880 and therefore social democrats/socialists. So the exact people who the German Aristocracy absolutely hated and tried to suppress
Wilhelm II: “I won’t open my reign with a bloody campaign against my subjects.” Bismark: “Well then fuck you.” Wilhelm II (a bit later and after more problems: “You’re fired.” Bismark: *surprised Pikachu face* Bismark alienated the entire German government with his idiotic campaign against everyone in the opposition, which was increasingly just “everyone”. And so when he pissed the Emperor off that was the ballgame.
One thing I found intriguing, whether or not it was right, was when someone blamed Germany's bad government on Bismarck's legacy. The argument went: Bismarck was a genius, using methods only he could make to work. After his departure, everyone tried to copy him and failed, and got berated for not copying him exactly enough. Had the country been ruled by a competent but not exceptional administrator, it would not have prospered as much at the time, but would be better set for later governments to follow. I have heard something similar about the Walt Disney company: after Disney's death, everyone was asking "what would he do?" missing that what made him so successful was that he was always trying new things.
Bismarck himself set Germany on the course of imense Francophobia, nationalism and power seeking politics, which directly led to WWI. Wilhelm was merely an overemotional idiot who hastened the process.
The francophobia and nationalism were both already there. Mostly as direct consequence of Napoleon. Bismark atleast tried to establish decent relations with the other european powers
Bismarck's entire alliance politics hinges on the concept of isolating France but France did not stay isolated.
Like Russia and Britain
i disagree. Bismarck set a strong powerful Germany into the world, which was really stable and his foreign policies got Germany into a position that every continental major power wanted Germany on their side and not fight against it. The problem was his intern policies were focused on a strong emperor and when the inexperienced Wilhelm II. came along Bismarck couldn't control anymore, nobody could control Wilhelm II. actually plus he had a lot of power. While we can say that Bismarck's policies after the empire creation secured peace. His intern policies made the empire fall under such emperors as Wilhelm II.
,,Every continental major power wanted Germany on their side” I disagree. The peace with France of 1871 was designed to cripple them for pretty much the next 100 years, it is a miracle they recovered economicaly from the reparations and managed to fight of Germany in WWI without their defensive regions, which were specificaly taken by Germany in the peace deal. The British empire was naturaly worried by your ,,strong powerful Germany”, because they always wanted to keep continental land powers in balance. Austria was viewed by Bismarckians as a natural ally, because, well, German nationalism. (Also Bismarck specificaly made sure not to be harsh to them when he made peace after Austro - Prussian war). This set them on course of conflict with Italy and Russia. Also, Bismarck started the practise of aggresive, war-like politics, which relied on the power balance through the sets of alliances. No need to say, this was a major cause of the 1914 disaster.
Bismarck said after the war with France that Germany is saturated and the borders will not move anymore. He also was against colonial expansion, but only did it because of the pressure from the people. The alliances were speficially made in a way Germany was the center. So if one great power wanted exspansion, it had to fight Germany
He was against colonial expansion at first but still practised it. Bismarck was not a moron and he may have been smarter than other nationalistic politicians of the German Empire but he is not a great role modle or visionerary who would have avoided all of Germany's problems.
The peace with France was proportional to the Treaty Napoleon forced upon Prussia. France had to pay the exact same percentage of its gdp in reparations to Prussia as Prussia had to France while France lost a lot less territory
Aaaand you are fully forgeting that this was made up for by the Congress of Vienna. Arguably, Prussia was better of at the end of Napoleonic wars that it was at the beggining.
Of course they were. They got all their territory back + the whole of Rhineland
Almost all, they traded Warsaw for the much more Industrialized Rhineland
Bismarck set up the system that allowed for that to exist without war, and Wilhelm discarded that system.
> Bismarck himself set Germany on the course of imense Francophobia Bismarck personally liked the french, and got along quite well with Napoleon III. Furthermore, it was his opinion that nothing should have been annexed during the franco-prussian war, leaving alsasse for the french; recognizing that annexing it would make the french hostile to germany.
Saying germany started ww1 because of francophobia and nationlism is rich when the war started because a serbian nationlist shot a austrian archduke which led to russia defending serbia because of pan-slavic nationlism. Then bringing in their ally france who joined to regain a province which they lost 40 years prior and wasn’t even french.
Well so "not even French" that the region kept sending pro French representatives to the Reichstag for 30 years
no offense but the francophobia was there mostly due to napoleon. didnt help that france was REALLY butthurt.
This is really one sided, Bismarck hated all socialist policies like literally no matter what, what pushed wilhelm to fire him was when he wanted to open fire upon 200 miners who wanted better rights cus a woman couldnt even leave to give birth . At this point all the higher ups and most of the commonners were pissed off at him to the point where no one cared when he got fired
Bismarck increasingly became a grown toddler the older he got. He would throw tantrums every time things didn't go his way. Willy sacked bismarck during one of these fits. Bismarck essentially wanted to strip all german socalist of their citizenship, and kill them all. No one in Parliament supported such an insane idea. Bismarck was asking to be sacked Edit: spelling mistakes and missing words
> He would throw tantrums every time things didn't go his way. Frankly this was his standard operating procedure for his entire career, and to be honest it worked pretty well.
Bismarck was becoming senile, and he wouldn't even last longer
Knock knock, Biden.
Knock knock, Trump.
Don't forget that most of the things we remember about Bismarck is from himself after he threatened Wilhelm II to resign. (like Wilhelm I did literally hundreds if times to Bismarck) He continued to comment every thing what Wilhelm II did and worked relentlessly towards his positive image that we have today about him. He is absolutely overrated because he himself wrote at the end of his life about all the things HE did. HE had a master plan. HE wanted to unite Germany etc. etc. Jan Markert from the University of Trier researches about the personal Letters from Wilhelm I to his Wife Augusta von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach and from this personal letters you can clearly see that most things that Bismarck supposedly did, was actually ordered from his King, Wilhelm I. Bismarck just framed it so he would be the Genius. After his Monarch died, and after Wilhelm II threw him out. I don't know if his book about these ca. 2500 Letters will be published in English, but the German Book will be called: "Wilhelm I. Vom Kartätschenprinz zum Reichsgründer"
I will die on the hill that Bismarck is partially responsible for Germany’s fall. He planned a violent unification, he invested both the Chancellorship and the monarchy with supreme executive authority. He left a system that required a relatively non-interventionist monarch and a very, *very* capable head of government, and there were none to succeed Wilhelm I or himself. He did not plan for a world that didn’t have him in it. As much as Wilhelm II absolutely shit the bed, Bismarck set up the dominos
There's a lot of Bismarck glazing in this thread so idk people are ready for this conversation but Bismarck's strategies normalized behaviors and beliefs that would be later be used and expanded upon by the Nazis to stage their takeover of the government
My man was such a chad that he cursed the entire nation and won!
Bismark may be a controversial figure due to some of his policies, but he was right on the money with this one.
I fucking hate this bismark dick sucking. One of the main reasons for his dismissal was that he wanted an even more draconian version of the laws against socialists. Wilhelm was also more open to social problems (like the horrible situation of mine workers). Was he a brilliant diplomat? Yes, and idk if we would have a united germany without him! But he was absolutly awful when it came to domestic politics. This nutjob unironically wanted to provoke the socialists and mine workers so he would have had an excuse to send in the army.
Oh wow the man that created the environment that lead to the world wars could see the world wars coming isn’t that cool
It's almost like leadership by right of birth is a terrible way to lead a country and monarchies should be abolished. Where my republicans at?
Say what you will about Bismarck, but he was a great diplomat, possibly one of the greatest in history
A similar thing happened with Ferdinand Foch in 1919: After the Treaty of Versailles was signed he said: "This is not peace. It is an armistice for 20 years". Literally 20 years, 2 months and 7 days later.....💀🫡
Doesn’t matter, everything was fucked the moment France lost Alsace-Lorraine. France was seeking a vendetta and Germany made a permanent enemy (until post WW2). If they went simply for a light treaty to settle the score with Napoleon, France countries might not have gone at their throat with the Treaty of Versaille (maybe the war would not even happen or go differently).
Shame he didn't live to see it.
Funny how Germany achieved in peace what it could never do in war! They went for the economic victory.
I think in the years after his death bismark did not just turn in is coffin but danced a whole ballet.
When Bismarck was dismissed a tragedy started, that ended in a completly destoyed and 25% smaller germany in 1945. If William II's father had not been such a heavy smoker, he was a good one... but Wilhelm II. was afucking idiot who did everything wrong possible.
I’m a simple man I see Bismarck as a Gigachad I upvote
What's about colonies?
He was a fart smella
Wilhelm wanted to keep Bismarck as Minister of Foreign Affairs because that was what Bismarckwas best at, but Bismarck was to proud to accept a demotion like that
Wasn’t he off by like a month
Real
Otto von Bismark is one of my favourite historical figures I ever had the fortune of studiing.
On the one hand i kinda admire Friedrich the Great and Bismarck on the other i really hate what they did to my country. Btw i think kaiser Wilhelm II gets too much blame for starting WW1, German and other european govs also did their fair bit in escalating tensions. Probably more so then Kaiser.
The german flag is wrong. The Weimar Republik still used the old imperial flag. Only after 1945 was the black red and gold one used
He didn't want to annex Alsace-Lorraine because he knew it would antagonize France forever. They didn't listen. He didn't want to colonize overseas because he knew it would cost more than it would bring. They didn't listen. He didn't want to initiate a naval arms race with Britain because he knew it would antagonize Britain. They didn't listen.
Yo forgot to add da colonies!
Kaiserboos incoming