Otto von Bismarck: The Iron Chancellor

[@ApostolicMajesty]

If you enjoyed this video, please like and leave a comment. It helps the channel a lot. Many thanks.

[@petroniusarbiter2632]

Bismark didn't want to unite with Austria because he wanted to stay out of war with Russia. And he believed that bring Austria in would create a war. And he was right!

[@joegerhardusa9017]

Bismarck

[@MrViktorolon]

Bisright

[@hyperion3145]

@@MrViktorolon Bisleft

[@bunk95]

Why market that portion of the system as something other than Austria in this point in time? (Keep in mind the story of the children who misuse the mines, keep in mind the salt sliders of the ost.)

[@josedelapinio]

Bismarck was a genius when it came to realpolitic. And if he wasnt right he was able to stack the deck and make it right

[@coreyparchem3470]

At one point you said "New King of Denmark" but I heard "nuking of Denmark" and my brain took a second to process what you meant lol

[@oaa-ff8zj]

The idea of Bismarck being an industrializing nationalist who ultimately created the framework for revolutions he so despised reminds me of hamilton, whom I think performed a similar role in America

[@jjcustard6378]

Excellent thankyou, I could listen to it all again

[@sunset-inn]

Bismark disliked this video.

[@ApostolicMajesty]

Bismarck has unsubscribed ;)

[@sunset-inn]

@@ApostolicMajesty Bismark: "Friendship ended with AM. My new best-friend is -" Come to think of it, it doesn't sound like Bismark had any permanent friends, only permanent interests.

[@JamesSmith-cd6rf]

We are due for a Bismarck or two in this world, though admittedly we might be looking for 10.

[@hyu7335]

Germany need someone like Otto von Bismarck now.. Otto showed that peace can't be attain only by total pacifism

[@peterkilbridge6523]

The "unification of Germany" (excluding Austria) was one of the greatest disasters in human history. It just goes to show that Fate makes a mockery of us feeble humans. "The best laid plans o' mice and men gang aft agly." - Robert Burns

[@fatpig8989]

​@@peterkilbridge6523Shit take.

[@bunk95]

For another [try]?

[@courtssense]

​@@peterkilbridge6523 How is German unification bad for humanity? Was Germany better off divided and weak? And if so, are the other unified states bad such as Italy or France?

[@peterkilbridge6523]

@@courtssense The Founding Fathers sought a weak Federal Government because they knew from history that power was dangerous and the enemy of liberty. If we look at Germany before 1871, we see a splendid civilization that was home to Kepler, Leibniz, Luther, Bach, Mozart, Handel, Kant, Hegel...Did I mention 🌿 Goethe 🌿? After 1871, we see industrialization and Prussian-style regimentation. No wonder Nietzsche preferred Italy.

[@giraffediety2477]

19:40 always a Chad move when your ambassador doesn't do what you want

[@jameslegare5394]

Thanks for the video! Have been strengthening my history knowledge which is lacking. Videos like this help enormously. - JL

[@llkdk]

Minor detail. Denmark only tried to annex/reintegrate Slesvig into the Kingdom of Denmark while wanting to let Holstein go. This was to ensure no large minority of Germans existed in the new democratic state. This was why the danish army let the German armies occupy Holstein unhindered. Now for various reasons this was impossible without war and Bismarck took full advantage of this.

[@bunk95]

That’s only fiction (that could be used to market things outside of the material its from).

[@MrCameronian]

The Prussian Italian pact wasn’t mutual, Prussia was committed to absolutely nothing. Friedjung described it as one of the most uneven treaties of the modern era.

[@thermionic1234567]

I’m glad to see Wilhelm I had a sense of humor!

[@aloadofbollocks988]

Where is this Metternich stream I'm hearing so much about?

[@drarsen33]

1:34:50 Prussia not including Austria in German Empire was huge mistake. Concern over reduction of influence of Prussia is something we also have seen in EU. One of major reasons why integration of Russia was never seriously considered and why integration of Turkey was put on hold is simply because France and Germany dont want another serious player at the table.

[@terencenxumalo1159]

good work

[@Richies_Beer_n_Gear]

1:35:10 AM: Under um, uhuh, under the, under uhuhuh... AM's brain: searching_for_euphemism.exe AM: ... the mid-century Germans... ME: Damnit! I was rooting for Mean Mister Mustache!

[@ApostolicMajesty]

Sorry, I forgot to install my new euphemism processor before going live.

[@Ciech_mate]

29 mins in, thank you so much for mentioning the overlooked stuff. I am currently going through my bachelors in History. Even though there are great strides in equality in the British educational system such as Black history (though I hate how the name puts all Black ethnicities into one group, its an Americanisation and ill fitting to nationalist Europe, it is still far from perfect and I tend to have a gripe on certain ways Eastern European ethnicies and their history are omitted or stagmatised within the cariculum. I am fighting against it and making it known, however my intent was to work on my degree but I cannot let it slide because of how much it bothers me.

[@art_deanoism]

Are there any books you'd recommend on Bismarck and the causes of WW1?

[@lordnorthumberland277]

I found Dreadnought to be a very readable insight to pictures of personalities, Bismarck included, in Britain and Germany that ended up causing the misalignment between both.

[@frederickiithegreat4903]

GUNS OF AUGUST BARBARA TUCHMAN Absolutely dazzling

[@justinallen2408]

@Bob X oof never will outlive that one

[@TheGeezer30]

Lord Milner's Second War, by John P. Cafferky.

[@Martin_Vienna]

Frederik the Greats Best Friend or Gay Lover?? Voltaire was for a while at his Court & said that Frederik wasn't to fond of Women Idk if it's true but there's this rumor about him

[@Bubba_Dub]

I'm a noob concerning this historical time period. Any good "must read" book recommendations covering the politics of Otto Von Bismarck?

[@ralphbernhard1757]

*Re. each and every "Bismarck kept Germany safe"-narrative, or variations of that.* It is based on the confusion of terms and definitions of words. The terms or concepts confused and whose definitions are often loosely conflated: *geopolitics* (international politics) and *grand strategy* (military scenario). *These are entirely different concepts.* Bismarck did not "keep Germany safe". The reality was that Bismarck appeased St. Petersburg, hoping that this *"appeasement"* would "keep Germany safe". Ahem...any historical similarities? :-) The Reinsurance Treaty gave a lot, and received little in return. It gave Russia a "shield for expansion", while in return it only offered limp geopolitical protection *(not* protection in regards to "grand strategy", or a "2-front war"). The reality of geopolitics at the time was that the Russian Empire was "cacooned" into a safe barrier created by geography/size. There was only one real "opening", which was Germany and Austria-Hungary in her west. If one has problems visualizing this, then image a horseshoe, placed on a map of pre-WW1 Russia, with the opening facing towards western Europe. The "horseshoe" is geography, which protected the Russian core with a barrier of geographical bariers with very few, and very limited (infrastructure) openings. *For all practical reasons (in geopolitics and grand strategy) a deal with Germany, kept Russia 100 % safe, while Germany was (in return) only 50% "safe" (geopolitics).* For Germany, there remained a dire threat of a 2-front war, and that was determined by geography also (Germany in the Center of the continent), which could only be closed by continuous vigilance and re-armament (quality was preferred over quantity). A bad deal, since the decision to rescind or not renew the treaty obviously also lay in the hands of St. Petersburg. Re the "100% safe Russia": For Russia, there was the Artic in the north, followed by Siberia, the Gobi desert, Himalayas, Hindukush, and mountainous Persia. These "barriers" continued with the Caspian Sea (not accessible to foreign navies), and the Caucasus. In Russia's south-west, there was only the weak "sick man", the Ottoman Empire (incl. by extension the Black Sea). As long as the core remained strong, the periphery would remain easily defensible. The "shield" protecting her west, was provided by Germany and Austria-Hungary, who involuntarily or "by extension" of the Reinsurance Treaty, or any other deal, protected Russia's western border. In regards to grand strategy, or the choice where to strike next: the initiative for such a choice remained in the hands of St. Petersburg for as long as her "non-aggression pact" was being "appeased" by Berlin (aka Reinssurance Treaty) remained intact. *What was there not to like for St. Petersburg?* The Reinsurance Treaty did not sit well with the London lords, regardless of the "kind words"-narrative we are reading about in our history books. I wonder why...LOL... *Further details often demoted to "ancillary status" if mentioned at all, but are in fact important concerning "what really happened".* 1) Unlike the previous agreements with Russia (Three Kaiser League) the Reinsurance Treaty was "secret", as far a "secrecy" was possible in the world of diplomacy. *Why could that possibly have been deemed as a neccessity?* In the age of the "Glastnost and Perestroika" of the times (openness/honesty of the Concert of Europe), why should none of the other powers know about this deal between Berlin and St. Petersburg? 2) It was St Petersburg who came up with the suggestion to replace the unworkable Three Kaiser League, which (initially) did not include Austria-Hungary (obvious hoodwink...let's leave HINT, HINT Austria-Hungary out of "our little deal" aka "throw the third little Kaiser under the bus"). 3) It was Bismarck himself who revealed it shortly before he died (1896), in an obvious attempt of a domestic political smear directed at Wilhelm II. In other words, in an attempt to get back at Wilhelm II for be "fired" and to discredit him or his status, he openly embarassed his own country by revealing "secret scheming" in an age where (LOL again) "everyone was supposed to be "transparent as glass"... The reality is that it was Bismarck himself who largely "wrote that history" with regards to "his" Reinsurance Treaty, and how he (backpat, backpat) "kept Germany safe". And because this fit in perfectly with "finger pointers", it was simply largely taken over by our own historians, who seemingly never bothered to investigate the premise of such an assumption. Historians quoting historians. Appeals to authority, and other fallacies... Reality couldn't have been further from the truth. As a general truth. *Actions speak louder than words.* Actions "count more" than mere words. Just like today, we should weigh "words" especially those of politicians and other power people (also words spoken across the divide of time in our history books) with a grain of salt. *What they did (historical sense) and do today (our reality today) is what counts, not what they say or said.*

[@davycrockett1112]

2:13:00 you guys are definitely 10s

[@BasedBooksYT]

Had to bail because the guy reading the extract at the start cannot read.

[@joegerhardusa9017]

How did Germany afford pensions?

[@ph9223]

I stumbled on this accidentally looking for some information about Otto Von Bismarck and listened to a little more than half, when the discussion, was, by that time so loaded with disinformation or misinformation I had to stop. Everyone is entitled to their opinions but not their own facts. They begin by insisting Germany was a nation state well before 1870, simply not true. They assert Napoleon was a failure when he actually did more to advance the idea of a united Germany when he toppled the HRE and consolidated 350+ independent German speaking entities rationalizing them into 39, and eliminating the Catholic Church’s stranglehold, by eliminating the all too powerful and very rich bishop and archbishoprics - not unlike Henry VIII’s dissolution of the monasteries which were also eating England’s economic pie. The “genius” Prussian statesman and ennobled Bismarck united Germany under the bellicose Prussian kings, though in less than 50 years after his death Prussia ceased to exist. This once powerful nation is gone. Removed from the map of Europe and the speakers want listeners to believe Bismarck was a “genius”. Over 300,000 book have been written about Napoleon and his rich legacy is one that continues to enrich the world and fascinate people. France remains a powerful and influential nation state in Europe, while Prussia has been forgotten, only a footnote in the long history of of Europe. Impossible for me to fact check all the disinformation without spamming this comments section and I want to be respectful so, I’ll stop here with a quote from Alexander Pope. “A little learning is a dangerous thing ; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring” I believe the first to lines make the point and it’s rude to beat a dead horse. I would recommend passing on this video, and probably the rest of their videos, given the errors and misinformation found here.

[@CaptainHarlock-kv4zt]

Unfortunately his shadow still looms over the entire German political spectrum.

[@yourdad7853]

YEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAH 2ND REICH MONARCH NATIONALISM HOO RAH

[@AURORA08A]

@1:08 you read from a source discussing the social and spiritual downside of Bismarck's magnificent but intrinsically flawed project.Please could someone provide the author/title?

[@ApostolicMajesty]

The source mentioned at this time stamp is Bismarck: Life and Times (2008) by Volker Ulrich. However this is not the source which discusses the 'spiritual' downside of Bismarck, which was my abridgment of La Guerre Occulte (1936) by de Poncins, Malynski and additions by Evola.

[@AURORA08A]

@@ApostolicMajesty Thank you very much.

[@arcuscotangens]

A short biography of Metternich noted another connection between him and Bismarck. Apparently, in his later years Metternich advised younger European statesmen personally, including Bismarck and Disraeli.

[@Konrad_Festung]

The most comprehensive video on Bismarck I have encountered to date. Great job. As someone who considers themselves to be very historically literate, at least in comparison to the general public - AM’s knowledge of this topic is humbling. I learned a lot. Cheers.

[@alfonsoantonromero932]

Maravilloso documental sobre Bismarck y de cómo se construyó un Estado tan importante como el de Alemania para Europa.👏😍😍🏋️👷🧑‍🔧🧑‍🏭🏭🏭🏗️🏗️🌆🌆

[@joegerhardusa9017]

We are nothing but serfs now! You will own nothing and be happy! A dreadful world we live in today. Monarchy and traditionalism is what we need now more than ever.

[@alejndraalmirowitsch4897]

i think the schleswig war are often get oversimplified to extent how the german public opinion, another claimant (augustenburg), and the london treaty played a role. from my understanding, bismarck was really cautious, as so far to not cause german outrage, manipulate augustenburg claim and not violate the london treaty that may cause a justification for intervention by other great powers (in particular russia, england, and france). austria, also bounded by the treaty, was acting in similar fashion with prussia. while this conflict seems to be simplified as austria-prussia vs denmark, in reality it's more a case of austria-prussia vs german confederation and german public vs denmark vs possible interventions from russia and britain.

[@joegerhardusa9017]

I would have liked to have heard Abit more about Franco Prussian war.

[@Anonymous-qi2zh]

If you liked this video, make sure to check out our Discord server: discord.gg/VSyZ53gUmt