Thursday, February 3, 2022

Bismarck: A Life

 Otto von Bismarck was a towering figure in the late nineteenth century. In this 2011 biography Bismarck: A Life, Jonathan Steinberg argues that accomplishments and triumphs achieved by this historic statesman stemmed from the force of his personality. What was this personality? While he could be charming and witty, he was a narcissistic bully who shamelessly used people, even his own children. Bismarck lied repeatedly, openly, and could never tolerate being wrong on anything. He demanded absolute loyalty but gave none in return. He betrayed those who supported him. He hated his enemies with a Nixonian passion and could be equally paranoid in interpreting the motives of others. 

 

Politically, Bismarck was a master strategist who played the long game, looking years in the future. He was an equally ingenious tactician combining multiple plans and options, setting different constituencies and factions off one another. He used any means necessary to gain an advantage and accomplish his goals. His drive to unify Germany took three wars that he essentially precipitated. Bismarck’s extraordinary successes and ability to make the big play when needed, accounts for his longevity. 

 

Lacking any adherence to an external ideology, Bismarck was a party of one. His objective was to maintain and enhance his own power. Although he depended on the will of the sovereign, his intensely histrionic performances full of threats and offers to resignation played King and later Emperor William I. The old monarch once commented that Bismarck was more important to Germany than he was. Steinberg points out how lucky Bismarck was that William I lived to be ninety years old. These pathetic emotional performances fueled Bismarck’s hypochondria, gluttony, and frayed his nerves to the breaking point time and time again. It did not help that Bismarck refused to share power or delegate tasks. Instead, he kept all the decision making – and stress -- concentrated in his own hands. 

 

Unfortunately, such personal control over the construction of a united Germany infused the state with some significant flaws. In international affairs, he set the stage for the alliance system that would become a contributing factor to the First World War. On the domestic scene, his lack of respect for the legislative branch (such as it was) remained a feature of German politics until 1918. His playing groups off one another hampered national unity and plagued social relations. His intense anti-Semitism was a harbinger of much worse to come.

 

I came away from this biography convinced Bismarck was a thoroughly repellant person.  

 

There are several things that I liked about the book. First, it was focused and coherent with clear arguments. That is an accomplishment with a subject so full of contradictions with both stunning accomplishments and total failures. Second, I liked the liberal use of primary source block quotations. Typically, I prefer them to be used sparingly, but Steinberg skillfully uses them to build the story and give the reader a sense of the times and what people thought. And, finally, I liked the authorial voice. Steinberg is present and part of the conversation, sharing his opinions and thoughts with the reader.  

 

There were a few negatives. First, I felt a lack of context to some issues. I do think that I understood some of  the political issues, especially around German unification and the Prussian king’s attitude towards it ,because I read Christopher Clark’s Iron Kingdom as well (a work Steinberg cites) simultaneously. Ditto the Prussian culture of Bismarck’s time. I certainly  would have struggled to grasp them had I not been reading Iron Kingdom. Second, I think Steinberg handles Bismarck’s marriage well, but his children go almost unmentioned until they are adults (at which point Bismarck dominates and uses them as he did to everyone else). His eldest son first appears in the text when he is thirty-one or two years old on page 406. The index is organized around people, not subjects. As an active index user, I found this quirky and a little frustrating. 

 

As a Gilded Age Americanist, I could not fail to notice Bismarck’s political domination in the decades when, except for Abraham Lincoln, the presidency of the United States was at its weakest point. Still, on a personal  level, I would much rather hang out with Chester Arthur than Otto von Bismarck. 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment