How important was Bismark in the unification of Germany Essays

How important was Bismark in the unification of Germany Essays How important was Bismark in the unification of Germany Essay How important was Bismark in the unification of Germany Essay Unification in Germany was a long held aspiration. During the 18th and 19th centuries, the German people were looking for an identity as a country and as a united people. This sense of nationalism stemmed from many origins such as Cultural, Economic, Political and Military. Through the Burtschengadens, wars of unification and the Creation of the Zolverein we can see that national sentiments were a wide spread phenomenon within Germany at this time, with growth of nationalism especially predominant in the Prussian area. Germany was aiming for unification, and the one man who brought about change is Otto von Bismark, upon whom the topic of German Unification is often centered on. He was seen as the smith of the nation and the force behind the developments of Unity of German states. However, there is a notation that Bismarks role in the unification process is often exaggerated. His admirers often exaggerate the extent of the obstacles in his path Medlicott. There were other factors that were significant in the Bringing together of Germany, however Bismark was able to manipulate them and bring a rapid expansion of national sentiments throughout the country resulting in the unification of Germany. Undoubtedly, Bismark contributed to a great extent in the unification of Germany; however, his amazing diplomatic skill wasnt in having perfect planning to achieve the aim of unifying Germen states. He was a brilliant diplomat and statesman, but in his famous Blood and iron speech, he set the tone for his rule he would use force to achieve his goals if necessary. The ends justify the means, Bismarck had particularly conservative aspirations and wanted to solve the problem of Klein versus Gross Deutschland, a heavily debated topic within Germany at the time. He gave rise to the term Realpolitik government policy was divorced from moral considerations, but dictated by the practical necessities of power and judged by success. Bismarks leadership can be described as cleverly calculated as his use of planning and manipulation was prevalent throughout. This was seen in his planning for the Austrian war, The Treaty of Prague and the manipulation of France. Taking advantages in the weakening of Austria after the Crimean War, Bismark intensified the unification of Germany under Prussian will. However equally important was the opportunistic notation of his leadership. Bismark was a clever opportunist who took full advantage of events as they occurred to secure his aims. He played this role well because he had a realistic insight into the nature of European politics. Since he had served as Prussian delegate to the Diet of the German Confederation, and ambassadors to St. Petersburg and Paris, he acquired first-hand insight on the structure of the Confederation, the necessity of a Russo-Prussian understanding, and the weaknesses of Napoleon III of France. His clever use of opportunism was expressed through the Ems telegraph. Bismark re-wrote the text of the Ems Telegram which was sent by the King in Ems. Bismark garnered the title of an opportunistic leader, as he also expressed this in the Polish revolt. Thus, it is fair to say Bismark was an opportunist rather than a master planner in completing the unification of Germany. He intended to strengthen the power of Prussia among the Germen states. Facing the threat of Austria, unless Prussia took the leading role in unification process, otherwise, Prussia would never have chance to come up. Bismark achieved the goal by taking advantages in circumstances, to build up friendship with powers, to isolate his enemies and to extend Prussian power in the name of German nationalism. This notation is reinforced by Pflanze only under the stimulation provided by Bismark for his own political ends did German Nationalism begin to move the masses. His diplomatic skill made himself as a significant political figure in Prussian politics. As expressed by Mosse -If he played his hand with great skill, it was a good one in the first place. Only on analyzing other factors influencing the unification of Germany, can we really determine whether or not Bismark role was greatly exaggerated. There were in fact many internal factors which contributed to the rise of nationalism. In 1815, nationalist feelings were expressed in universities among Germanys writer and poets such as Hansel and Gretel by the Grimm Brothers. Cultural nationalism found a repetitive audience amongst the middle classes who attended Germanys better schools and universities. They formed the Burtschengadens and student societies. However these were outlawed by Metternich in the Carlsbad decrees. The German states were starting to experience the related processes of industrialization and urbanization. The former created a growing class of unemployed artisans whose skills had been replaced by machines. The latter created slums and squalor. The consequent discontent led to demands for political change, for governments that would be more responsive to needs of the poor; some of these demands included a demand for single German government. In addition, the growing middle classes saw the advantages of unity as the customs union or Zollverein led by Prussia had increased their prosperity as trade flourished; this was also emphasized by the creation of the Frankfurt Parliament. Moreover Prussia itself was becoming richer and more able to pay for a large army that might challenge Austria. Finally economic growth meant improved communications and great travel especially by rail; nationalist ideas could spread more easily. As Carr said Prussia became railway to success. Thus in several ways social and economic change helped the rise of German nationalism. The idea of a united Germany had deeper roots. United by language it was felt that they should be united politically as well. There were external factors, which we have to establish in identifying whether Bismark role was greatly exaggerated. The French conquest, under Napoleon, of the German states had profound consequences. Invasion, occupation by a foreign ruler and a war of liberation, all inspired a stronger sense of German identity. The French had rearranged the small states into 3 large ones demonstrating that change was possible. They had also introduced liberal laws which removed the power and privileges of the nobility. The spread of liberalism helped develop nationalism as it reinforced the idea that people with a common language, tradition and culture had a right to decide they should be part of one state. Political nationalism hinges on the collective weakness of the German states in the face of the foreign states. The German states faced threats expansionism from powers including Russia threatening Prussia and Austria, France threatening the west bank of the Rhine and Denmark threatened territory in the Duchies of Schleswig. Bismarks role has not been greatly exaggerated but it is important that it is kept in context. It is evident that many historical opinions have huge divided. It is clear that Bismark formed Germany in the manner in which it came about. For instance, the type of state that emerged and the timescale in which it emerged. However, it is equally clear that greater German unity was something that had a degree of unavoidability and that as Bismark himself remarked Marked cannot create the current of events, He can only float with it and steer.