Chancellor dictatorship

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term Chancellor Dictatorship was coined by contemporary liberal critics to characterize the government and the term of office of the first German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck to characterize his system of rule (see also German Empire ).

Criticism and allegations

Especially after the domestic political change of 1878/79 and Bismarck's turn to the conservatives, criticism of the founder of the empire increased , especially from the old liberals and from those around the Progress Party . Franz Freiherr von Roggenbach apparently first used the term chancellor dictatorship in a letter to Ludwig Bamberger . In the same sense, Eugen Richter and Eduard Lasker spoke of a "usurper" and a "dictator" and deplored the "autocratic element [...] in the form of pseudo constitutionalism". Similarly, even the Old Liberals expressed Gustav von Mevissen and later the Liberals associated Friedrich Kapp . The term was not used in the exact constitutional sense in the 1880s, since formally nothing had changed in the subordinate position of the Chancellor. As a result, the term was also taken up by Bismarck's conservative opponents such as Hans Lothar von Schweinitz , by foreign diplomats such as Lord Ampthill and later by historians. Even the historian Friedrich Meinecke , anything but an enemy of Bismarck, formulated that Bismarck would exercise “a kind of dictatorship in the new empire”. Bismarck himself contributed to this characterization when he wrote: "In everything, just not by name, I am the master of Germany."

Constitutional Law and Constitutional Reality

In fact, the constitution, which Bismarck played a key role in, first of all of the North German Confederation and then of the German Empire, particularly emphasized the position of the Chancellor. The Chancellor was the mediator between the German states represented in the Bundesrat, the Kaiser and the Reichstag. In contrast to the Länder, the Reich did not have a collegial government in which, for example, the Prime Minister was only something like a primus inter pares, but the Reich had only one regular minister and that was the Chancellor. All other management positions were state secretaries who were bound by instructions. The Chancellor was appointed by the Emperor and could also be deposed by him. But since Bismarck had prevailed against parliament during the constitutional conflict and thus indirectly secured the throne Wilhelm I, he stuck to Bismarck undeterred. On the contrary, Bismarck had threatened to resign several times in order to convince the emperor of a factual issue. The emperor always gave in. The position of the Chancellor was all the stronger because he chaired the Federal Council and Bismarck, as Foreign Minister and Prime Minister of Prussia, could use his hegemonic position to achieve his goals if necessary.

Although the Chancellor was constitutionally supposed to be just a kind of managing director of the Bundesrat, Bismarck undoubtedly occupied the central position in the constitutional triangle between Chancellor, Bundesrat and Reichstag. However, the monarchical-bureaucratic executive faced a modern institution with the Reichstag. Compared to the three-tier suffrage in Prussia, the general and direct suffrage was a step towards greater political participation. Even though many areas, especially in foreign and security policy, remained arcane areas of the monarchy and the influence of parliament, it played a role in the basic design of domestic policy in the broadest sense that could hardly be overestimated. The Chancellor was dependent on the approval of parliament for every Reich law and every budget. However, the executive, with the right to dissolve parliament, had strong leverage to make the Reichstag compliant.

In the first few years, the cooperation between the Chancellor and the liberally dominated parliament worked relatively smoothly. Both the executive and the liberals were interested, for different reasons, in suppressing the ultramontane movement in Catholicism. The Kulturkampf from 1871 to 1887 against the influence of the Catholic Church and the politics of Pope Pius IX. were led jointly by the Chancellor and the Liberals. At times, all Catholic bishops in Prussia were arrested or expelled from the country, and the filling of numerous pastor posts was hindered. The Center Party, as the political representation of Catholicism in the German Reich, was classified as "hostile to the Reich". The socialist law against the social democratic SAP was also supported by a broad parliamentary majority of conservatives and national liberals. However, this example also shows the limits of Bismarck's power. When another extension was due in 1889, the Chancellor could no longer find a majority in favor. This was one of the reasons that ultimately contributed to the dismissal of Bismarck by the new Kaiser Wilhelm II .

The term in discussion

Today it is generally no longer used in historiography because it is too simplistic and too personalistic for the domestic political situation in the German Empire. An exception is Golo Mann , who spoke of a "dictatorship or semi-dictatorship" by Bismarck.

Following on from Karl Marx 's work The Eighteenth Brumaire by Louis Bonaparte , Hans-Ulrich Wehler attempted in his 1973 book on Kaiserreich, the peculiar mixture of the Bismarck domestic political system of modern democratic elements (e.g. universal suffrage) and repression (e.g. B. Socialist Law) to be described as Bonapartism . In his social history , Wehler has moved away from this and, following on from Max Weber's sociology of domination, has tried to describe Bismarck with the term charismatic ruler. But this attempt at a typological definition of rulership has also met with widespread skepticism in the professional world. In order to avoid a one-sided interpretation, some authors prefer the term "Bismarck system".

literature

  • Hans-Peter Ullmann : The German Empire 1871-1918. Frankfurt, 1995.
  • Hans-Ulrich Wehler : German history of society. Third volume: From the German double revolution to the beginning of the First World War. 1849-1914. Munich, 1995. pp. 362f.
  • Hans-Ulrich Wehler: The German Empire 1871-1918. Göttingen, 1988.

Remarks

  1. ↑ Quoted from Wehler, Gesellschaftgeschichte, p. 362 f .; Wehler, Kaiserreich, p. 63 ff.
  2. ↑ Michael Seelig: Review of: Möller, Frank (Ed.): Charismatic leaders of the German nation. Munich 2004. In: H-Soz-u-Kult, June 15, 2005
  3. ↑ Ulmann, Kaiserreich, p. 85.