AHQ/AHC: Better Wilhelmine Germany

[VadisDeProfundis]

Okay, so, Germany under Kaiser Wilhelm II was a rising power, but one with a rather large handicap: bad leadership. Many focus on Kaiser Wilhelm himself, and it's probably undeniable that his psychosynthesis and conduct probably wasn't good for Germany. But oftentimes I have seen folks saying that many of Germany's problems stemmed from other, more systemic factors, and that many powerful people made mistakes that they would und then unload onto the Kaiser. To what extent does this hold? What mistakes did Germany make that could have been avoided without changing the Kaiser or somehow massively curtailing his influence?

One thing I've seen many talk about is Germany's highly aristocratically-minded diplomatic corps, that eventually didn't manage many successes. What tweaks would have been possible, for Germany to implement, in order to have more successful foreign policy? Generalizing, could Germany make some relatively small(no changing the monarch, no massive upheavals in the political system) changes and get better results? The PoD is after Wilhelm's ascension to the throne in 1888.

 

[John Roscommon]

The biggest problem is that the constitution framed by Bismarck was designed for an energetic Chancellor (himself) and a relatively passive monarch (Wilhelm I). There was no provision for a consultative cabinet and no ministerial responsibility to the Reichstag; ministers were chosen by and solely responsible to the crown. This creates a cornucopia of point failure sources that would be difficult to overcome by tweaks.

 

[stevej713]

The biggest problem is that the constitution framed by Bismarck was designed for an energetic Chancellor (himself) and a relatively passive monarch (Wilhelm I). There was no provision for a consultative cabinet and no ministerial responsibility to the Reichstag; ministers were chosen by and solely responsible to the crown. This creates a cornucopia of point failure sources that would be difficult to overcome by tweaks.

To add to this - geopolitically speaking, Germany could hardly be in a worse position. Russia to the east, France to the west, and a dependence on natural resources that could only be gained from a small strip of coastline that could easily be blockaded by a certain perfidious maritime power. When you add in the fact that Imperial Germany was a Frankenstein's Monster of states, governments, and institutions (including a military establishment that had long favored preemptive strikes), Kaiser Wilhelm II was probably an inevitable consequence - a product of his time enabled by his country's imbalanced government to bring his vulnerable country to ruin.

 

[VadisDeProfundis]

The biggest problem is that the constitution framed by Bismarck was designed for an energetic Chancellor (himself) and a relatively passive monarch (Wilhelm I). There was no provision for a consultative cabinet and no ministerial responsibility to the Reichstag; ministers were chosen by and solely responsible to the crown. This creates a cornucopia of point failure sources that would be difficult to overcome by tweaks.

I don’t want to downplay the importance of institutional mishaps and constitutional problems in Imperial Germany, but couldn’t some of their effects be ameliorated, or some situations helped without fundamental changes?

To add to this - geopolitically speaking, Germany could hardly be in a worse position. Russia to the east, France to the west, and a dependence on natural resources that could only be gained from a small strip of coastline that could easily be blockaded by a certain perfidious maritime power. When you add in the fact that Imperial Germany was a Frankenstein's Monster of states, governments, and institutions (including a military establishment that had long favored preemptive strikes), Kaiser Wilhelm II was probably an inevitable consequence - a product of his time enabled by his country's imbalanced government to bring his vulnerable country to ruin.

Could events elsewhere have stabilized Germany? Things like prolonged periods of unrest in Russia, or a stronger Austria able to project power and be a meanginful ally, a more loyal Italy, or an isolationist Britain(on European matters at least) help Germany? Again, I don’t want to downplay anything, but could any minor improvements help here?

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Could events elsewhere have stabilized Germany? Things like prolonged periods of unrest in Russia, or a stronger Austria able to project power and be a meanginful ally, a more loyal Italy, or an isolationist Britain(on European matters at least) help Germany? Again, I don’t want to downplay anything, but could any minor improvements help here?

A strong Ottomans, facilitated by an Austria who following the Crimean fallout with Russia had adopted a policy of supporting reform in, rather than undermine them, as a way of expanding influence and had convinced Germany to do the same, could help alleviate Germany's position in terms of providing a route of expanding influence and economic investment woulden't immediately bash up against Britain and drive them into supporting the Franco-Russians. That would give the Reich a chance to construct a network of markets through the Balkans and Near East, which dosen't require a naval build up, and generally put them in better terms to the British. Whilehelm II's sense of grandiosity can be channeled in other directions, perhaps a "Weltreich" being not on the British model but pushing a dream of an "Ostreich" and the great struggle he embraced between the "Slav and Teutons" taking the forefront? Given Britain has no reason to reconcile with Russia in that instance if Germany looks like they aren't on a collision course, you might even be willing to see them indulge the man's ego somewhat and fufill his need for acceptance as a Great Power by his cousins, which would remove some of his drive to prove himself.