The German Kaiser

Discussions on all aspects of Imperial Germany not covered in the other sections.
G-man
Member
Posts: 77
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 01:11
Location: England

The German Kaiser

Post by G-man » 29 Aug 2003 19:52

Hi guys.

This may be considered "off-topic" but what was Wilhlem's relationship with Edward VII and later George V like before the outbreak of WW1?

Did they get on well?

I've heard that the British establishment always felt an element of distrust with the Kaiser and that he (Kaiser) didnt get on with Edward VII.

Is this true and can anyone enlighten me more on this please?

User avatar
Balrog
Member
Posts: 1234
Joined: 17 Feb 2003 15:09
Location: USA, North Carolina/Manchukuo/Dominican Republic

Post by Balrog » 30 Aug 2003 00:15

the kaiser was a bit of jerk. he used to make fun of edward for not doing any active military service and talked down to him. i don't really know the reasons, everyone has freudian ideas about this,the kaiser's damaged arm, his youthful rise to power, etc. the kaiser an edward were 2 entirely different personalities.

edward was an aged playboy. he avoided active military service, most responsiblities, and was involved in scandals.(mistresses) when edward was young his own father thought his only concerns were elegant clothes, women, and parties. the father was taken ill while trying to consul him to improve his behaviour and be responsible. edward's father , prince albert, got sick and died in the 1860's, queen victoria never forgave him for her husbands death and blamed edwards rake behaviour, and the stress it caused her husband.

kaiser whilhelm II was always a bit of cad, but he did have a deeply felt sense of duty to his country. he was ,in his private life, devoted to his wife and family. he was a well trained and competent soldier. he had his faults. he was perhaps too young to become emperor when he did. he fired bismark from his job, and made a mess of the iron chancellor's carefully thought out policies. he decided to build up the german navy, second to none, and got involved in an arms race with england. there were brief moments when the english enjoyed a thaw with him, especially after queen victoria's death.

kaiser wilhelm and his uncle king edward were just too different to get along. the aged playboy who had accomplished very little in his lifetime, except for being involved in women and the party circuit. wilhelm, the responsible soldier and active statesman.(whilhelm's view of himself)

bundi
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: 02 Sep 2003 20:20
Location: Hungary, Budapest

Post by bundi » 06 Sep 2003 18:09

Hi, guys...

About Wilheim Kaiser.

After that the serbian anarchist killed Prince Franz Ferdinand (the son of Franz Josef Austrian Kaiser) in Sarajevo, Germany was the first who declared war to the antant countries (England, France, etc.).

Austria and Hungary declared war only a month later.
So, we could say that Kaiser Wilheim was the first who entered the war with a very strong army.
He entered the war because of Elsas- Lotaringia (a big region which was captured by the Frenc in 1871- it is a German territory).
He hoped (like Adolf Hitler) that he could reunite that territory with Germany.

After losing the Ist World War, he was exiled to Netherland by the new anarchist, communist regime. This regime was to stop the right- side politic and to make Germany a country like Soviet- Russia (today Russia).
These works are failed after Hitler made the NSDAP and the SA was made.

Wilheim was very old and was very ill. And Wilheim was very sad because of his empire, which was failed at Paris, Versailles after the war. (In Versailles were that kind of peace conferences which destroyed many countries, like: Germany, Turkie, Hungary- Hungary's situation was the worst!!!)

So... When Hitler in 1941 captured Netherland, Wilheim was very happy, because he survived many years' illness to live when German soldiers are guarding before his house.

He died in the 1940s.

Sorry for my English, it could be better...

User avatar
Felix``
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 07 Jul 2003 13:30
Location: Germany

Post by Felix`` » 06 Sep 2003 23:52

He entered the war because of Elsas- Lotaringia (a big region which was captured by the Frenc in 1871- it is a German territory).

No. Elsaß-Lothringen had been captured in 1871 - but by the Germans.

He hoped (like Adolf Hitler) that he could reunite that territory with Germany.

Nonsense. How to reunite if it is already a part of Germany?

After losing the Ist World War, he was exiled to Netherland by the new anarchist, communist regime.

Wrong, he went into exile and wasn't exiled.

This regime was to stop the right- side politic and to make Germany a country like Soviet- Russia (today Russia).

Depends on which part of the left parties you look at - the MSPD wanted no communism but a democracy.

These works are failed after Hitler made the NSDAP and the SA was made.

Hitler did not form the NSDAP, it had been formed before, under the name DAP. He was an investigator for the bavarian police and got into this party that way, then overtook it and changed the name. Nevertheless, neither the NSDAP nor the SA had anything to do with letting this revolution fail - maybe you read something about some Freikorps and mixed it with the SA.

Where did you get this misinformation from?

bundi
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: 02 Sep 2003 20:20
Location: Hungary, Budapest

Reply...

Post by bundi » 07 Sep 2003 09:29

---No. Elsaß-Lothringen had been captured in 1871 - but by the Germans.---

R.: The eastern part of Elsas-L. was in the hand of the french like the Saar- region and the smaller villages of the Ruhr- territory!

---Nonsense. How to reunite if it is already a part of Germany?---

R.: upper...

---Wrong, he went into exile and wasn't exiled.---

R.: He WAS exiled! See Churchil's diary!

---Depends on which part of the left parties you look at - the MSPD wanted no communism but a democracy.---

R.: You are right, but there wan't only two parties of them! And the whole media was in the hand of them.

---Hitler did not form the NSDAP, it had been formed before, under the name DAP. He was an investigator for the bavarian police and got into this party that way, then overtook it and changed the name. Nevertheless, neither the NSDAP nor the SA had anything to do with letting this revolution fail - maybe you read something about some Freikorps and mixed it with the SA.---

R.: Hitler was one of those people, who wanted changes. Ernst Rohm was who made the party's arm, SA by the consider of others. The NSDAP was made bythose, whom wanted to change the politic situation. One of them WAS Hitler. After 1922, when he made some kind of putsch with the Bavarian prime minister he was sent to prison. (Where he wrote Mein Kampf). In the Mein Kampf, he sais: "I am the one, who made a party from a movement."
And NSDAP was not formed just from DAP. Many social- democratich joined them.

---Where did you get this misinformation from?---

:)

User avatar
Mikael
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: 07 Jul 2003 19:19
Location: Sweden

Post by Mikael » 07 Sep 2003 10:33

The Kaisers Opinions


"only fit to live in a country house and grow turnips"
The Kaiser on Czar Nicholas II


"a very nice boy"
The Kaiser on King George V (only six years his junior)


"He is satan, you cannot imagine what a satan he is"
The Kaiser on King Edward VII

User avatar
Felix``
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 07 Jul 2003 13:30
Location: Germany

Post by Felix`` » 07 Sep 2003 12:16

I am terribly sorry, bundi, but you are wrong again. Apparently you are totally mixing up the situation before and after world war one. Elsaß-Lothringen was totally controlled by Germany until 1918 and had been captured in 1871. Look in a history book and it will proof this. No rhine town was under french controll before 1919, the controll of the rhine was a result of Versailles.

And still the Kaiser wasn't exiled. And only the KPD wanted communism, and the media wasn't controlled by them (except their party newspaper).

The political situation in 1922 Germany wasn't an anarchisitc-communistic one, it was a parlamentaric democracy. I did not doubt that Hitler wanted changes, but this does not include a putsch with (but one against) the bavarian prime minister. In fact, the prime minister ordered the police to shoot at the putschists. And you do not really believe anything what Hitler wrote in "Mein Kampf", do you? The party was there before him (small and other name, but neverthelles existing) and he got to know it by being an investigator for the bavarians. And why do you think that real social-democrats joined the NSDAP? There was a small more leftist group in the NSDAP (under Strasser, but the social part of the NSDAP wasn't important)? The NSDAP was a reactionaire force - not connected with the SPD, KPD or whatever. In fact, the SA and the Battle Groups of the Social Democrats fought each other in bloody street wars.

Sadly your information is still wrong, regardless of how often you might repeat it.

If you are capable of speaking german, I might suggest the Ploetz (for a broad overview of history) or any other history book if you aren't capable of getting one. Even the school books aren't telling these stories, so I am still wondering where you got it from?

bundi
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: 02 Sep 2003 20:20
Location: Hungary, Budapest

To Felix''

Post by bundi » 07 Sep 2003 17:45

First of all, the kaiser WAS EXILED! And this is true.
Second of all, Elsaß Lotaringia was in the hand of Germany since 1871. I was wrong when I spoke about the territory. I spoke about Elsaß AND Lotaringia -NOT THE TERRITORIES, BUT THE SMALLER REGIONS... VILLAGES IN THE EASTERN PART OF ELSAß LOTARINGIA-. Today they have other names, french or something like that.
I don't know weather which side of the politics you are, but Hitler made a DEAL with the bravarian prime minister in 1922, and they was drinking in a pub with beer HB, that's why this putch' name is Munich Beer Putch, and guess what!!! he needed changes!
What kind of school books are you speaking about? German scoolbooks?

User avatar
Felix``
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 07 Jul 2003 13:30
Location: Germany

Post by Felix`` » 07 Sep 2003 19:01

The putch is named "Beer Hall Putch" because it was first accounted in the beer hall and because it was surpressed by the bavarian police in front of the beer hall. This police had been send by the prime minister of bavaria who had first faked to support Hitler and then ordered the police to do their duty. This is why he (the primie minster) got EXECUTED later by the SS during the so called "Röhm Putsch". Btw: The Putsch was 1923, not 1922.

So, the Bavarian Prime Minister wasn't allied with Hitler.

ANd what about the eastern villages of Elsaß-Lothringen? Of course they have french names nowadays : Because they are french. Maybe you wanted to refer to some western parts of the region which was called "Lothringen" in France before 1871 - Germany did not take all of it (some tiny parts which were neither important for the defense of the Reich nor economically (not to forget that they were totally french and not inhabited by germans) were not occupied, because of the stated reasons). But these parts had absolutly nothing to do with the outbreak of the first world war - I repeat: Nothing.

And I do not get the point, why you emphasize the fact that Elsaß-Lothringen was german by this time so much - as this was my point and in every way opposite to what you wrote in your statements.

Oh, and: You should make clearer to which persons you refer, as the he in your third last sentence could be a pointer to either Hitler or the Prime Minister, this makes the content really hard to understand.

ps: I am speaking about every history book, this is not only the wisdom of schoolbooks, it is what every encyclopedia says. I suggest you do some more research on the Internet or in your local library, it should be easy to get a book about the first world war.

pps: This is nothing against you and I do NOT want to be agressive, but sadly you did not show a great knowledge of these affairs. I am not an expert myself, but what you write here is just plain wrong.

ppps: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERbeer.htm <- Kahr NOT willing to work with Hitler, forced with a pistol
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_II_of_Germany <- Wilhelm GOING into exile

pppps: Please, if you have any sources or evidence for what you stated, then post it here. (Please before monday evening, because I will be away from then on until Saturday)

bundi
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: 02 Sep 2003 20:20
Location: Hungary, Budapest

To Felix

Post by bundi » 07 Sep 2003 20:39

Dear Felix''

I am learning history. This part of the history can be found in evry hungarian history book and in the chronicle of Germany!!!

Hitler was allied with the bavarian prime minister!
And the Mein Kampf is not an objective book, but it is based on the german post- war history.

And Elsaß Lotaringia's eastern part was the economical and the industrial center of the Elsas region. It was kept by the French after 1871!!!

The "HE" means Wilheim!!!

Unfortunatelly I only have hungarian- language source, but I will look after the english version of the chronicles on the net.

Sorry, if I was so rude, but I made all of my exams the best grade from history and I am very intereasted in the twentieth century history, so I read a lot. From Churchill, from Fraser... And also from german and hungarian writers.

And I wouldn't say that I don't know history.




Read Wilheim's diary about being proud of a nation. It was published in 1943, I think. - HE WAS EXILED
Read Von Pappen's diary about the NSDAP in the early 1920s!

User avatar
Felix``
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 07 Jul 2003 13:30
Location: Germany

Post by Felix`` » 08 Sep 2003 06:35

Hi Bundi,

>I am learning history. This part of the history can be found in evry hungarian history book and in the chronicle of Germany!!!

What is "the chronicle of Germany"? I think you did not read the sources I gave you.

>Hitler was allied with the bavarian prime minister!

He tried to force him with a pistol - nevertheless this did not work. They were not allied.

>And the Mein Kampf is not an objective book, but it is based on the german post- war history.

No, it is based on Hitlers crude beliefs. He is only talking about the master race, the bad jews and that he would make it alle better.

>And Elsaß Lotaringia's eastern part was the economical and the industrial center of the Elsas region. It was kept by the French after 1871!!!

No, this is not true. First of all: The eastern part would be nearer to Germany than the western part. Why should Germany take the western part with the gap of the eastern part?
The facts: The coal and steel industry of France prior to 1871 was hugely concentrated in Elsaß-Lothringen, but of course the germans took EXACTLY these parts in 1871, so the whole big industry was in german hands after 1871, not in french. I suggest you get a map and look again, as your misinterpretation of eastern and western is only confusing.

>The "HE" means Wilheim!!!

Wilhelm needed changes in 1923? Could you please explain this?

>Unfortunatelly I only have hungarian- language source, but I will look after the english version of the chronicles on the net.

The "hungarian sources" you are talking off seem to be faulty I you are really stating what is written inside of them. I beg you: Do a short internet research on english talking webistes, they will prove me right and your statements wrong.

>Sorry, if I was so rude, but I made all of my exams the best grade from history and I am very intereasted in the twentieth century history, so I read a lot. From Churchill, from Fraser... And also from german and hungarian writers.

I did my history exams with 15 out of 15, with my main topic Germany from 1871 to 1945. So I should know this business.

>Read Wilheim's diary about being proud of a nation. It was published in 1943, I think. - HE WAS EXILED

This diary is totally subjective, it is based on the reflections of an old man. He abdicted hiw crown and wasn't abdicted. He went into exile and wasn't forced into exile. The revolutions started AFTER this. Can be proven by any source you will search.

>Read Von Pappen's diary about the NSDAP in the early 1920s!

And what shall this diary prove?


Like already said: Do some research on this topic, I already gave you two links to read. If you really quote what is written in your books, then they are totally faulty. How old are they, btw?

Best regards, Felix``

[who will be away for a week]

User avatar
dead-cat
Member
Posts: 435
Joined: 04 Mar 2003 22:06
Location: Mainz, Germany

Post by dead-cat » 09 Sep 2003 16:07

After that the serbian anarchist killed Prince Franz Ferdinand (the son of Franz Josef Austrian Kaiser) in Sarajevo, Germany was the first who declared war to the antant countries (England, France, etc.).


the first contry to declare war was Austria-Hungary (to Serbia) on 28th July. on August 1st Germany declared war to Russia followed by a declaration of war to France. However Germany did not declare war to the UK.


Austria and Hungary declared war only a month later.

Austria-Hungary declared war to Russia on August 6th. They did *NOT* declare war to neither France nor UK. France declared war to Austria Hungary on August 14th.

So, we could say that Kaiser Wilheim was the first who entered the war with a very strong army.


No he wasn't. as i pointed out above, Austria-Hungary was first to declare war (to Serbia). As for the strong army. The russian army was stronger in numbers, so was the french (although by a small margin). The british navy was stronger than the german. You can say that the german army was maybe the most ready and quick to mobilize. and the heavy artillery was better.

He entered the war because of Elsas- Lotaringia (a big region which was captured by the Frenc in 1871- it is a German territory).


again, no he didn't. Alsace-Lorraine was annexed by Germany in 1871, as Felix pointed out. Look at the map.

User avatar
fdewaele
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 30 Jul 2003 14:27
Location: Belgium

Post by fdewaele » 10 Sep 2003 10:55

and Franz Ferdinand wasn't the son of the old Kaiser Franz Josef (his son Rudolf committed suicide at Schloss Mayerling) but his nephew.

Karl da Kraut
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: 16 Sep 2002 12:00
Location: Germany

Post by Karl da Kraut » 10 Sep 2003 16:08

EmperorWilhem II.’s abdication:

Generally, the (supressed) mutinity of sailors at Wilhelmshaven on (10/28/18) is regarded as the starting shot of the German revolution in 1918. At that time Wilhelm II. was, of course, still the German emperor. On the third of November, the sailors in Kiel mutineed, and this time counter measures failed. The rebellion spread quickly from the coast to the larger German cities. On November 7, the Wittelsbachers (Bavaria) were first German dynasty to fall.
On November 9, the revolution reached Berlin. Hundreds of thousands people demonstrated in Berlin streets. The only troops within the city, three Jäger (infantry) battalions, joined the protests.
Wilhelm II. had left Berlin already for the OHL (High Command) headquarters in Spa/Belgium on the October 29. When the situation in Germany became increasingly critical, chancellor Prince Max of Baden, who feared a radicalization of the revolution, urged Willhelm II. to resign. Wilhelm II. rejected. In Spa, the OHL pointed out to Wilhelm that the armed forces were no longer loyal to him, and telegraphed to Max von Baden (in Berlin) that Wilhelm’s abdication was probably imanent – though the emperor himself had never given a statement which would have allowed such a conclusion.
After receiving this message, in an effort to calm down the rebellious masses, chancellor Max von Baden announced at 11.30 – high-handedly – the abdication of both the emperor and the crown prince. At 12.00 Friedrich Ebert (chairman of the MSDP – moderate majority of the Social Democrats) appeared in the Reichskanzlei, demanded that Max von Baden should make him chancellor and promised to act according to the constitution, with the exception that he could not guarantee for the monarchy. Max von Baden accepted, named Ebert chancellor, and resigned.
Legally, these proceeding resembled a coup d'estat:
a) The imperial constitution didn’t allow the chancellor to depose the emperor – which Max von Baden factually did, as Wilhelm II. had never declared his abdication.
b) According to the constitution, only the emperor had the right to install the Imperial Chancellor.
On the nextmorning, Wilhelm II. formally transferred the military supreme command to Hindenburg and left for the Netherlands. It was not until November 28 that Wilhelm II. signed a document of abdication.

So, Wilhelm II. was not formally exiled by the new government, but circumstances certainly forced him to seek refugee in the Netherlands. And surely he did not abdicate voluntarily.

Hitler and Kahr

First of all, Gustav Ritter von Kahr was no longer Bavarian prime minister in November 1923. In fact he had resigned from that post, but was named Generalstaatskommissar (General State Commissioner) instead on September 25 1923. Kahr was a conservative politician hoping for a restauration of the Bavarian monarchy. However, he was a nationalist, not a seperatist. In 1920 Kahr met Hitler and liked him because of his anti-communist attitude. In the time of Kahrs prime ministership Munich became a hotbed of right wing organizations and parties, and since 1921 Kahr and his allies often cooperated with the NSDAP.
However, this was not the case concerning the Beer Hall Putsch. In late 1923 there was a major conflict going between the national government in Berlin and the Bavarian state government in Munich. A triumvirat consisting of Kahr, von Seisser (head of the Bavarian police) and von Lossow (commander of military forces in Bavaria) began to prepare for a “march to Berlin” against the “red” government there. Hitler was not to play any role in this plan. When Hitler realized this, he decided on November 6 to improvise his own “march to berlin”. Two days later, Hitler and a large group of stormtroopers entered in the Bürgerbräuhaus where Kahr was holding a speech. Hitler fired a gunshot into the air, and declared the Bavarian state government and the national government as deposed. Kahr, Lossow and Seisser were forced into a backroom, where Hitler tried to persuade them to join forces with him. But to Hitler's great surprise, his three captives simply at first even refused to talk to him. Hitler responded by waving his pistol at them, yelling, "I have four shots in my pistol! Three for you, gentlemen. The last bullet for myself!" But Kahr,Lossow, and Seisser did not give in.. Suddely Hitler left the room and went back out to the podium and shouted...
"... The government of the November criminals and the Imperal President are declareddeposed. A new national government will be named this day in Munich. A new German National Army will be formed immediately... The task of the provisional German National Government is to organize the march on that sinful Babel, Berlin, and to save the German people! Tomorrow will find either a National Government in Germany or us dead!"
This led everyone in the beer hall to believe the three men in the back room were joining Hitler. There was enthusiastic cheering for Hitler. General Ludendorff now arrived. Ludendorff, in WWII chief of the staff of the German High Command, was widely regarded a national hero. Hitler knew the three government leaders in the back room would listen to him. At Hitler's urging, Ludendorff advised Kahr, Lossow, and Seisser (still in the backroom) to go along with Hitler’s attempt to seize power. Not having much choice, they reluctantly agreed, then went and faced the crowd, showing their support for Hitler and pledging loyalty.
Upon hearing news that attempts to take over army facilities had failed, Hitler left the Bürgerbäuhaus, trying to handle this problem personlly. Kahr, Lossow, and Seisser exploited this situation and left the beer hall. Immeadeatly they began to organize countermeasures. In consequence, army reinforcments had arrived in Munich, and armed police was already waiting for the Putschists...
Kahr's, Lossow's and Seisser's name appear on Hitler’s proclamation of the "national revolution" which was published on the morning of November 9. Possibly, that’s why bundi believes Kahr and Hitler were "allied". Yet that had hardly happened according to the free will of these men. In fact, the early hours of the same morning (hours BEFORE the Putsch failed miserably) Kahr had published a proclamation which declared that he had been forced to pretend allegiance to Hitler: "All declarations extorted from me, General von Lassow, and Colonel von Seisser by pistol point are nill and void. If the senseless and purposeless attempt of revolt would succeed, Germany would be thrown into the abyss - and Bavaria with it."

Conclusion: Kahr was NOT "allied" with Hitler on November 9, 1923. Actionally they were enemies. However, until May 1923 they had cooperated several times.

G-man
Member
Posts: 77
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 01:11
Location: England

Post by G-man » 15 Sep 2003 19:33

What sort of power did the Kaiser have over German affairs?

Was it pretty much the same as The English Monarch had over England or did he have more?

Return to “Imperial Germany”