How Far Was Germany an Entrenched Authoritarian State

1046 Words5 Pages
To a certain extent I do agree that Germany was an entrenched authoritarian state as the population was being led by a hereditary monarch that detained an unnecessary amount of power; the Kaiser was the defender of traditional privileges and enjoyed a large amount of support from other ruling elites, especially those leading Prussia. However, Germany was not an absolute monarch as there was an elected branch of the government, the Reichstag. As well the Kaiser also desired a world role; he therefore supported industrialisation as well as being enthusiastic about new technology and new industries. The prestige status of the Kaiser was still deeply ingrained in the minds of the Reichstag members. The constitution granted the emperor extensive powers which established his personal rule, as he had the power to appoint key government members, such as the chancellor and Reichstag members. This ensured that the Kaiser was supported in parliament as the men were prepared to pass all the legislation the Kaiser put through. The prestige status of Wilhelmine is shown through the political crisis of the daily telegraph affair when in an interview with a journalist the Kaiser said he desired to have a closer relationship with Britain. Consequently Germany was outraged and members of the Reichstag demanded constitutional limitations for the Kaiser. However, no constitutional change was made; clearly showing Wilhelmine had power to ignore the Reichstag and rule personally. German political parties were extremely weak and divided, especially the Social Democratic Party, which was a left wing party made up of the moderates and the Marxists which within it had a small number of communists. Although they all had the common enemy of the Kaiser and all wanted to stress the importance of collective rights the Marxists were much more extreme and therefore there tactics were weak as
Open Document