Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Successes and failures of the weimar
Successes of the Weimar Republic
Crisis leadership literature review
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Successes and failures of the weimar
Gustav Stresemann, the Reichskanzler of Weimar Republic and a German Foreign Minister in 1923-1929, had a short-term significance on Germany’s role in Europe as his diplomatic skills and policies of cooperation helped his country to ultimately gain its equality in the European arena. From its birth until 1923, the Weimar faced problems, which seemed to reduce under Stresemann’s time in power when “diplomacy served as a lightning rod for the currents of opposition to the Weimar Republic.” Stresemann’s main objective was to end German diplomatic isolation. His key foreign policy achievements were the Locarno Treaties 1925, the Treaty of Berlin 1926 and German entry into the League of Nations 1926. Stresemann was instrumental in the development of German's role in Europe, leading his country to the “Golden Years of Weimar”, which is evident from his Peace Prize award for his diplomatic work.
The Locarno Treaties were a centerpiece of Stresemann’s approach to building stronger relationship with Europe. According to Grathwol, these were “the first step in Stresemann's grand design” as “he had brought Germany into the concert of European powers, and, in this setting he could begin to revise the peace settlement.” It is arguable that the Pact filled Europe with the “spirit of Locarno” and can be seen as Stresemann’s success in improving German diplomacy. For example, Carr described it as “a great diplomatic triumph” .Contrastingly, some German nationalists saw it as a governmental breakdown eager to negotiate but not fight for Germany. Furthermore, there was a distrust in Briand, evident in Low’s cartoon where he is shown shaking hands but hiding a boxing glove, suggesting his unclear intentions – evidently, France made agreements ...
... middle of paper ...
...the brink of peace” . Despite the fact that he was broken in health, “he retained his youthfulness of mind, a will for peace that was all-transcendent.” This is echoed by a source, which was published soon after his death where he was described as “a strong advocate of Peace” who worked hard “to eradicate bitterness of the War” . His policies are very significant as observed by Viscount d’Abernon, “Stresemann has left Germany stronger than when he took the helm in 1923, and Europe incomparably more peaceful.” This view is supported by his contemporaries: “Stresemann had accomplished his great task: he had restored defeated Germany to the status of a Great Power on an equal footing with the others, had freed the Ruhr and the Rhineland from foreign occupation, and had abolished foreign control of Germany’s economic and financial life, as well as of her armaments”.
In 1914, Europe was diving into two separate powers. One was Triple Entente composed of France, Russia and Britain. Other one was Triple Alliance, consists of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy. (Pope 2) Each of the countries was connected with different treaties. The caused of European countries’ unstable political situation and threat of war was present. By arranging alliances with other governments, most countries found ways to protect themselves from assault. While Germany was becoming the center of the struggle, Europe made a spider web of tangled alliance that led most countries into two opposing powers. (Hamilton 16) In the late nineteenth century, the most surprising event in Europe was the birth of united state of Germany. Under the leadership of the Chancellor of Germany, Otto von Bismarck, system of alliances was established to achieve peace in Europe. By 1890, Bismarck succeeded in having every major power into his alliance system...
After the First World War Germany recognised her first ever democratic government, the Weimar republic lasted from 1918 – 1933 an astonishingly long time given its turbulent start. The November revolution saw the election of soldier and worker councils similar to that of the Russian revolution in 1917, it spread across Germany like wildfire and in turn split the country before a democracy could even be instated nevertheless on November 9th 1918 the German republic was established. From then on The Weimar Republic was set on unstable and insecure path and this is why it is one of Germanys most important historical periods; it was Germanys earliest form of non-imperial government and rule and its collapse in 1933 paved the way for the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party. For these reasons there have been endless works published on the Weimar republic and the outpouring of literature post world war two focuses on the collapse of the Weimar republic and how the Nazi party came to power. However, to understand why the debate surrounding the Golden Era in the Weimar Republic is an interesting one and lacking in historical works, it is key to examine the historiography of the Weimar republic as a whole. Furthermore, to understand why historians focus on other periods in the Weimar’s history in particular the consequences of the treaty of Versailles and the consequences of the Wall Street crash in 1928 which led to its collapse.
When Stresemann had taken over he had helped Germany by reducing Hyper-Inflation and the economic problems that she had. The Nazi's didn't have enough supporters. Hitler had thought that people would just come and join in helping them take over the putsch. Hitler and Ludendorff had assumed that they wouldn't be shot at. Ludendorff had let von Khar and Lossow leave the beer hall.
Richard Bessel’s article stresses the political structure of Weimar Germany as the cause of its failure. Its structure was flawed in numerous ways, all of which contributed to its inevitable failure. First of all, the problems within Germany due to the First World War were massive. This caused economic, political and social problems which first had to be dealt with by the new Weimar government. The loss of the war had left Germany with huge reparations to pay, and massive destruction to repair. In order to gain the capital needed to finance efforts to rebuild, and repay the Allies, the economy had to be brought back to its prewar levels. This was not an easy task.
middle of paper ... ... It was easy for him to threaten, and hard for him to conciliate.” (pg. 216) Finally, Taylor explains, after Britain’s failure to help reach an agreement, the aggression dragged both France and Britain into war with Germany. Taylor’s perspective on the origins of the Second World War, although controversial, is not one so easily dismissed.
Throughout history, negotiation has been a powerful tool used by world leaders to avoid violence and solve conflict. When negotiation succeeds all parties can feel that that have achieved their goals and met their expectations, but when negotiations go awry countries and relationships can be damaged beyond repair. The Munich Agreement of 1938 is a primary example of this type of failure, which was one of the catalysts to the start World War II and Czechoslovakia’s loss of independence. The Czech people were greatly overlooked during this agreement process, which still in some instances affects the country today. The 1930s were a challenging time for Europe and the powers within it due to the aftermath of WWI and the worldwide economic depression. Meanwhile, Fuhrer Hitler and the Nazi party were continuing their domination of Europe and threatening to invade Czechoslovakia, which many felt would most likely incite another World War. To prevent this England, France, Italy and Germany entered into an agreement, which would allow Germany to seize control of Sudetenland and is today known as the ‘Munich Pact’. Sudetenland had a large German population and its borders were in strategically strong areas for the German military. For negotiations to be successful there are many components that one must be aware of such as personalities of all parties, end goals of each person and the history from the country. England led the process with an appeasement policy as an attempt to mollify Hitler and the Nazi party and prevent war, which this pact did not. The Munich Pact is a perfect example of how negotiation can fail when all of the pieces do not fall correctly into place.
...eaknesses to win their loyalty. Finally, the written agreement of Versailles was purported to represent the peaceful ending to warfare I, however, it became the prelude to a different war. it had been originally an attempt to revive order and supply a peaceful conclusion to warfare I. The sick feelings and economic upheaval that resulted provided the proper climate for Hitler's dominance, in post-war FRG. The contributor’s participants of Versailles had alternative motives behind the peace agreement apart from a peace settlement. Their stingy actions resulted in not solely the economic hardship of FRG, however inflation and state altogether of Europe. The severity of the reparations contained during this document set the stage for history to repeat itself. Therefore the terribly method within which the written agreement of Versailles was forced on the German people.
Since the unification of Germany in the late 19th century, attitudes of nationalism, Prussian militarism and expansionism saturated German society. As one can clearly see in the writings of the influential German historian, Heinrich von Treitschke, war and territorial expansion were seen as being necessary to the preservation and advancement of German society. He states that, “War is for an afflicted people the only remedy… Those who preach the nonsense about everlasting peace do not understand the life of the Aryan race, the Aryans are before all brave.” The mobilization of the people and resources, for the purpose of making war, were believed to be the means of preservation and advancement of German society. These ultra-nationalistic attitudes and beliefs resulted in widespread German enthusiasm with the coming of war in 1914. As expressed in a German newspaper, The Post, “Another forty years of peace would be a national misfortune for Germany.”
The German Weimar Republic was an attempt to make Germany a more democratic state. While this was a very good idea in theory, the Weimar Republic was ineffective due to the instability that came with it. Several factors contributed to the instability of Germany’s Weimar Republic, such as the new political ideals brought forward and the government’s hunger for war. To begin, one of the factors that contributed to the instability of the Weimar republic was the presence of new political ideals. Marie Juchacz unintentionally highlighted that reason in her speech to the National Assembly.
Johann Sebastian Bach wrote four Orchestral Suites. This piece is the second of the five movements that compose his Orchestral Suite No. 3. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? The date it was composed remains unsure, as there is strong evidence that the writing of the piece was done during his years at Köthen, even though the piece is said to have been composed and premiered some years later in Leipzig sometime between 1727 and 1730 by his son Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, one of his students and himself. Johann Sebastian wrote out the main violin and continuo parts, C.P.E. Bach did the same with the trumpet, oboe, and timpani parts, and Johann Ludwig Krebs, his student, finished with the second viola and violin parts.
The Congress of Vienna in 1814-15 created the so-called German Confederation under Austrian and Prussian hegemony, but this unit disappointed the dreams of nationalists. The rivalry of Austria and Prussia paralyzed it in a way comparable to the effects of Soviet-American dualism on the United Nations during the Cold War. Almost everywhere, the old rulers repressed the nationalist movement after 1815. The German princes realized that nationalism required ...
Because of the state of Germany’s economy, Hitler portrayed himself as the saviour of Germany, the man that was going to restore the respect that their forefathers had earned & installed. However, under no uncertain terms was he going to do it alone, he pr...
German people were unused to a democracy and blamed the government “November criminals”, for signing the Treaty of Versailles. From the very beginning, the new Weimar government faced opposition from both sides of the political spectrum. The Left wing Spartacist group, lead by Liebknecht and Luxemburg, looked up to the new Soviet councils in Russia, wanted to place Germany into a similar system.
Carr, William. A. A. The Origins of the Wars of German Unification. London: Longman Group, 1991. Hamerow, Theodore S. The Social Foundations of German Unification, 1858-1871.
To the subject and passive onlooker, those meticulous organizers of the Paris Peace Treaties allowed for an unfortunate amount of flaws to enter their task of creating a treaty that could satisfy all of the nations of not only Europe but of the world as well equally. Yet one must attempt to put that passiveness behind and admit that those of the time of post World War I had truly no idea what was to come of their decisions. Thus, the decisions of these toilers of the Paris Peace Treaties undoubtedly made a medley of wrong judgments that were virtually unforeseen at the time. The first of these mistakes was that they looked over the problems that the innumerable ethnic groups of Europe would cause. Second to be overlooked was France, still highly intimidated and insecure of a Germany that it wanted to see completely annihilated and rendered powerless.