Whereas there is no doubt that Germany was economically modern, it is debatable whether its politics were backwards or not. Assuming that a policy of autocracy is backward then Germany would definitely be politically backward to some extent.
On one hand, Germany was somewhat democratic because it was a federal state. It consisted of 25 different states, which preserved their own constitutions, rulers, parliaments and administrative systems. They also had the power to decide on a variety of matters such as education, health and the police. The power of the states in the central government was maintained through the Federal Council (Bunestrat). This is a system similar to that of America today, which suggests democracy.
In addition, the German parliament (Reichstad) was elected every 5 years by universal manhood suffrage and they had the power to make federal law and had to approve imperial budget. Even the Kaiser could not ignore the Reichstad and had to patch up working majorities in order to pass his legislations.
Similarly, the Kaiser did not have full power over Germany because criticism of him was common and he was not in a position to take firm action against it. Moreover, the Kaiser did not dare to use the army against the rising threat of the Social Democratic Party in Germany. This also suggested a potential for future democracy in Germany.
On the other hand, Germany was greatly an autocratic state and when Kaiser Wilhelm came into power, he had no intention of sharing his power with the German parliament (or the ‘’ape-house’’ as he referred to them as). Furthermore Prussia was clearly the largest and most powerful of the states. Other states in the council hardly had any power because the Prussian King was head of the empire and they had 60% of the population, which meant that they had the greatest voting power as well.
Ultimately, the chancellor and members of Bundestrat and Reichstag were somewhat responsible to the Kaiser and their decisions had to be approved by him. Even the army took an oath of personal loyalty to the Kaiser rather than to the state, which greatly enforced the authoritarian power he had over Germany.
In conclusion, I do agree that Germany was economically ‘’modern’’ because all statistics I have seen confirm this. However, I believe that Germany’s political system was greatly backward but not completely because Kaiser Wilhelm did have almost authoritarian control over Germany. However people did criticise him and he could not completely ignore the Reichstad nor the SPD, which challenges how autocratic Germany actually was. Finally, the very definition of ‘’backward’’ is also debatable. I do not believe it is fair to say that autocracy is a backward system and democracy is the right approach because both of these have its flaws.
