What's the maximum plausible lifespan of the North German Confederation from 1867 on?

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The North German Confederation had only a short-life before it the 2nd German Reich, containing South German states, was established.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_German_Confederation

What's the maximum plausible lifespan of such a northern Germany only federation from the adoption of its constitution in April 1867 onward? There already was the economic zollverein with south German states and an offensive and defensive military alliance. But how long can we delay political unification of southern Germany from this point?
 
There is not a "due date" for a complete German unification (kleinDeutschland style).
Bismarck does not want the catholic south German kingdoms in the Federation; the king of Prussia does not want them; the Prussian Junker do not want them.
The Second Reich proclaimed in January 1871 at Versailles was in a way a fluke; maybe better, was an emergency surgery necessitated by the impossibility to wrap up the Franco-Prussian war in October or November 1870, as was in Bismarck's plans. Give Bismarck his early peace treaty and the NGC can live and prosper at least for a generation.
 

Beer

Banned
There is not a "due date" for a complete German unification (kleinDeutschland style).
Bismarck does not want the catholic south German kingdoms in the Federation; the king of Prussia does not want them; the Prussian Junker do not want them.
Hi!
Sorry, but this simply Stuß (codswallop)! Both Bismarck and King Wilhelm wanted German unification, just with Prussia definitely in the drivers seat. Look in a good history book about the Austro-Prussian feud about who was the leading power in the German Confederation. Bismarck always wanted a Unification. Even a simple looksee in the Federal Archives proofs that without doubt.
Because of the drive to Unification, Berlin made a very lenient peace with the South German States in 1866 and the negotiations about a Unification started in earnest. First drafts about a Unification were made fast and were already in place when the Franco-German War began.
Bismarck and the South just waited until the political situation was convenient to annouce it. The NGFs days were numbered the moment Austria lost to Prussia, so practically from the start. The NGF was just a vehicle of Bismarck and Prussia to ensure a Unification to their liking.
 
Hi!
Sorry, but this simply Stuß (codswallop)! Both Bismarck and King Wilhelm wanted German unification, just with Prussia definitely in the drivers seat. Look in a good history book about the Austro-Prussian feud about who was the leading power in the German Confederation. Bismarck always wanted a Unification. Even a simple looksee in the Federal Archives proofs that without doubt.
Because of the drive to Unification, Berlin made a very lenient peace with the South German States in 1866 and the negotiations about a Unification started in earnest. First drafts about a Unification were made fast and were already in place when the Franco-German War began.
Bismarck and the South just waited until the political situation was convenient to annouce it. The NGFs days were numbered the moment Austria lost to Prussia, so practically from the start. The NGF was just a vehicle of Bismarck and Prussia to ensure a Unification to their liking.

If Bismarck and the king of Prussia wanted so much a complete unification of Germany, why the German Confederation was dissolved after the war of 1866?
The NGC left the south German catholic states out of the confederation, although they were linked to it by the defensive/offensive alliance and by the Zollverein (and for the Zollverein good old Otto invented a brand new parliament which was a world-first! As was to be expected the south Germans voted for anti-Prussian parties in the Zollverein parliament).
Please note that I am quite aware that Bismarck in his memoirs says that he had always the idea of German unification in his heart. Do I believe him? Short answer: NO. Long answer: Otto was very good in masking his true goals, and equally good in convincing friends and opponents that he was always a blunt. open-spoken man, the "honest dealer" of 1878.

Maybe it's time that the super-German nationalists read again the history of German unification, taking away all the trimmings and curlicues which have been encrusted on it.
 

Beer

Banned
If Bismarck and the king of Prussia wanted so much a complete unification of Germany, why the German Confederation was dissolved after the war of 1866?
The NGC left the south German catholic states out of the confederation, although they were linked to it by the defensive/offensive alliance and by the Zollverein (and for the Zollverein good old Otto invented a brand new parliament which was a world-first! As was to be expected the south Germans voted for anti-Prussian parties in the Zollverein parliament).
Please note that I am quite aware that Bismarck in his memoirs says that he had always the idea of German unification in his heart. Do I believe him? Short answer: NO. Long answer: Otto was very good in masking his true goals, and equally good in convincing friends and opponents that he was always a blunt. open-spoken man, the "honest dealer" of 1878.

Maybe it's time that the super-German nationalists read again the history of German unification, taking away all the trimmings and curlicues which have been encrusted on it.
Hi!

This is really rich of you to accuse others of nationalism, when you show such a weak base knowledge of that time! And your opinions about the Zollverein are facepalm-inducing. A little anecdote about the Zollverein: During the war of 1866, the South German states, despite being on the side of Austria still sent their Zollverein earnings for processing to the central office in Berlin. And Prussia sent their net gains back to the South German States despite being at war with them.

The German Confederation was dissolved because Bismarck and Prussia wanted their main competitor in Germany, Austria, out of the way. You simply could not kick out Austria from the Confederation easily, so for the Prussian aims in Germany, namely Unification under Prussian hegemony, the Confederation had to go.

As Bismarck´s aims,there are tons of documents in the Federal Archives, even the archives of some other nations, from biographers, from collegues of Bismarck and all proof that Bismarck wanted a Unification under Prussian hegemony from the get go.
So please, polish up your history knowledge, put your propaganda pamphlets into the rubbish bin they belong into and stop trolling. Or embarrasing yourself with this show of non-knowledge. Sorry to be this harsh, but I do not react lightly to accusations when the arguments are so clearly wrong.

And to give you some more knowledge about German Unification: Bismarck left the South Grman States out of his new Federation, because to keep France quiet during the War against Austria, he had promised Napi III, to not include the South German States. But he already knew that a war against France, which was itching to meddle in Germany again, would com sooner or later.
 
Last edited:
Hi!

<snip>

Discussing religion with a priest never pays, does it? :rolleyes:

I'll leave you to your happy world where Germany is always king of the hill, Barbarossa sleeps under his mountain ready to awake in the hour of need and there is always a czarina ready to die on schedule for the good of Prussia and/or Germany.

Just a little piece of advice: a little politeness has never hurt in any kind of discussion
 
The North German Confederation had only a short-life before it the 2nd German Reich, containing South German states, was established.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_German_Confederation

What's the maximum plausible lifespan of such a northern Germany only federation from the adoption of its constitution in April 1867 onward? There already was the economic zollverein with south German states and an offensive and defensive military alliance. But how long can we delay political unification of southern Germany from this point?

The NGC was never really meant to be a long-term thing, but a stepping stone to full unification under Prussia. So really it lasted for as long as it could. If Prussia had lost the Franco-Prussian war the Confederation would have been dissolved and the old German Confederation, under Austria, restored. Basically it was an all or nothing situation.
 
Discussing religion with a priest never pays, does it? :rolleyes:

I'll leave you to your happy world where Germany is always king of the hill, Barbarossa sleeps under his mountain ready to awake in the hour of need and there is always a czarina ready to die on schedule for the good of Prussia and/or Germany.

Just a little piece of advice: a little politeness has never hurt in any kind of discussion

None of that was implied by his response? :confused:
 

Beer

Banned
None of that was implied by his response? :confused:
Hi Van555!

Lord Kalvan seems to believe he found out groundbreaking new knowledge about Germany. Unfortunately for him, there is so much proof against it available easily and his knowledge about German history is VERY skewed. But considering his accusations of Nationalism baseless and directly in response to my first answer, Lord Kalvan seems to be a run-of-the-mill German-hater, trying to obfuscate his believes behind some "historical" concoction.

@LordKalvan
Accusing someone of Nationalism first thing (and groundless at that) is not polite either. Neither are accusations of preaching, when your own arguments are clearly erronous.
From the gaps and leaps in your arguments, it seems you read some books on German history, but either not enough or some of the books were overaged propaganda stuff.
I have a lifelong penchant for history and if not for a few unforeseeable events, I would have become a full-time historian instead of my actual profession. You can lecture me on German history when your knowledge about it surpasses mine, but not earlier. Considering your adventurous ideas, I doubt that will happen anytime soon.
As said before, sorry if all this sounds harsh, but you post evidently wrong ideas like facts. I personally would like to discuss some of your ideas for curiosity´s sake, but since you began with accusations directly instead of defending your theories, I doubt you have any interest beyond spreading propaganda.
 

Beer

Banned
Wasn't it? I really beg to differ.
Hi!

No, LordKalvan, Van555 sees it exactly right! It is obviously irrelevant what someone posts, you just see what you want to see. It clearly doesen´t matter if it is just in your imagination.
Evidently anybody not sharing your views is a nationalist, in your eyes. In all your posts there are more baseless accusations than arguments.

Enough feeding of the Troll!
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Hi!

No, LordKalvan, Van555 sees it exactly right! It is obviously irrelevant what someone posts, you just see what you want to see. It clearly doesen´t matter if it is just in your imagination.
Evidently anybody not sharing your views is a nationalist, in your eyes. In all your posts there are more baseless accusations than arguments.

Enough feeding of the Troll!

While both of you have been less than ideal in this thread, you just went a Bridge too Far.

DO NOT insult. Use that little "report post" button.

Thank you.
 
Top