The Emperor of Yankeeland - Kaiser Donald I
"But
our good master cannot resist not only giving free rein to his personal
feelings on every question, but also expressing them publicly." said of
German Kaiser Wilhelm II by Count Alfred von Wandersee.
When Donald Trump ascended to the
presidency with almost 3 million fewer votes than his opponent, I immediately
began to worry about how nations stumble into catastrophe. Germany's
precipitation of World War I came immediately to mind, given the bellicose nationalism
and racism of Trump's campaign rhetoric.
Since
November, I have been reading John C. G. Röhl's monumental biography of Kaiser
Wilhelm II. Both Trump and Kaiser Willhelm II are accidental leaders of
powerful nations. Trump was elected by narrowly carrying Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, although he lost
the popular vote which shows that the people rejected his program. Trump's
insistence on massive vote fraud is merely a means of trying to bully a mandate
for a program that the voters rejected if
you believe in the democratic principle of one person, one vote. Trump could be
a decent president if he understood this and obeyed the will of the people. But
his ignorance of the relationship between politics and government, plus his
egomania prevents him from sharing power even with the voters.
Kaiser
Wilhelm was also an accidental sovereign. His grandfather, Wilhelm I, King of
Prussia and the first German Kaiser, died in 1888, after seventeen years on the
throne. It was under Wilhelm I and his Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, that
Germany became the predominant European industrial and military power.
Frederick, Wilhelm I's son and the father of Wilhelm II, ascended the throne
but was already fatally ill from cancer of the throat. Frederick had served for only ninety-nine days before his twenty-nine-year-old son ascended the throne.
And therein lies the tale. Had Frederick III served a normal reign, the whole
history of Europe and the world might have been different. Frederick, the
son-in-law of Queen Victoria, was more of a constitutionalist than his
handicapped, absolutist, autocratic son.
"Kaiser Wilhelm II had reached
the zenith of his personal power,
objectively speaking. And yet he was clearly
far from satisfied. He showed less restraint than ever in giving vent to his
autocratic, indeed aggressive claims to power in defiance of the Reich
(Federal) and Prussian (state) government, the Reichstag (Congress) and the
overwhelming majority of the German people whose attitude towards him was becoming
increasingly critical. Every restriction placed on his power irritated him: he
wanted to be in command and expected unconditional obedience. 'I know no constitution; I know only what I want,' he
exclaimed. 'All of you know nothing,' he
asserted peremptorily to his admirals. 'I alone know something, I alone
decide!'" (p. 843, Wilhelm II, The
Kaiser's Personal Monarchy,1888-1900 by John C. G. Röhl)
"With
his grandiose desire to make his mark, Wilhelm not only drove the new Weltpolitik (Global politics)[1]
forwards at a far greater speed than the
experienced officials in the Reich Chancellor's palace
and the Foreign Office considered wise. His sudden and unpredictable initiatives
on the world stage also had the effect of
irritating and alarming the governments of the other powers. Repeatedly driven
to the edge of desperation, the statesmen in London, Paris and St. Petersburg
saw themselves confronted not only with a dangerous international rival but
also with an excessively powerful and hyperactive ruler who seemed to be not
quite responsible for his actions. No less disturbed were the German diplomats,
who had occasion enough to throw up their hands in horror at the Kaiser's inconsistencies."
(p.927, ibid.)
"She noted in her
diary in April 1904 that all German
diplomats were complaining about 'the initiatives and arbitrary action taken by
H.M. [His Majesty] who is not open to any advice, conducts only his own very personal policy
and is leading glorious Germany into
disaster unless God helps us!' The 'forceful personality' of the Kaiser and his
autocratic style were having a corrupting effect on the diplomatic service, the
provincial administration, the officer corps,
the upper echelons of society in general, and even on some academics. Diplomats
complained of the Kaiser's habit of praising reports which recounted 'any comic
or racy tale, a piece of bravado, a student prank,' whereas he was bored by
serious analyses and found fault with them....What I find so distressing is the
Kaiser's mentality, which lies behind all these actions: he refuses to take
advice from his legal, responsible servants, instead, being a slyboots and a
tyrant, he hopes he will be better served by creatures who owe him their
unearned position, and sows envy, hatred, mistrust, and servility among his
most senior officials, thus opening the door to every kind of baseness."
Hildegard von Spitzemberg (p. 124 - 125) Wilhelm
II: Into the Abyss of War and Exile 1900 - 1941,
Röhl's introduction
to this chapter concludes: "I shall attempt to show, on the basis of
documentary sources, the appalling degree to which Wilhelm II was responsible
for the fact that in the eyes of the other great powers the German Reich
rapidly became a malevolent rogue state, which was not prepared to abide by the
recognized rules of the international community but which, on the contrary, was
lying in wait for any opportunity to overturn the existing world order to its
own advantage." Sound familiar?
In early 1900, Count
Waldersee commented with dismay: "I find my
view confirmed increasingly, that the Kaiser not only wishes to rule
autocratically, but in fact does rule autocratically. He no longer needs the
advice of anyone, and demands unquestioning execution. . . If Ministers summon
up the courage to mention difficulties in the country or the Reichstag, he
always thinks they are spineless. There is no such thing as opposition. . . No
one has his own opinion anymore, or at least no one dares to assert it, each of
them silently submits, knowing that if he raised difficulties he would be
removed. Where are the men of character to be found! Flatterers and cowards are
being reared. . . How long can it go on like that it is impossible to say. . .
But we can be sure of one thing: that if serious times should come, there will
not be enough men around. The Kaiser ruins everyone he deals with. That such a
system must 'lead to a bad end' was 'absolutely clear and indeed very many
people feel it now.' If setbacks or
mishaps arose, which would be particularly dangerous in matters of foreign
affairs, the survival of the monarchy itself would be threatened. For then
people would say 'the Kaiser did everything himself and he is to blame', the
General prophesied." Wilhelm II:
Into the Abyss of War and Exile, p. 102 - 103.
"Holstein was
highly critical of the combination of threats of war and premature withdrawal
which characterized the Kaiser's foreign policy....'He likes to begin his foreign policy with
an attempt at intimidation, but retreats if the opposition does not at once
give in.'" ibid, p. 462
"In mid 1905, Wilhelm aligned
himself so passionately with the 'Front' against the secretary of state that
Tirpitz, as Berghahn writes, 'was utterly amazed by the Kaiser's state of
excitement' during one audience. The 'fury' and 'ill-humor' with which the
Kaiser reacted to the arguments that Tirpppitz produced against Koester's and
Senden's ideas caused the secretary of state [Tirpitz] to contemplate resignation
as early as in the spring of 1903." ibid, p. 468
"'It
displeases him that he is not yet in sole charge, and above all that he is not
yet seen in well-informed circles in the navy as the only one in charge. The
sad and distressing thing about such a talented monarch is that he values the
appearance more than the essence. What
is crucial for him is not the actual matter at hand but the question of whether
he is at once seen as the only figure of authority. He completely overlooks
the fact that only the essence, the thing
itself, is lasting and that what lasts is credited to him alone,...'" ibid, p. 471
"The Kaiser could not tolerate independent-minded men
around him, the Hofmarschall wrote. 'He had a sixth sense for this kind of
person. 'He does not grapple with them for long, and then he casts them aside.
There is no question of their influencing him...None of them has ever succeeded
in asserting his view against the Kaiser, and none has ever had a lasting,
reliable, strong influence on him.'" ibid, p. 498-499
"The monarch would not tolerate
any independent expression of opinioin and systematically weaned all those
around him away from any tendency to contradict. 'The Kaiser has a dramatic but not a political instinct, he considers
the momentary effect but not the consequences, and is for the most part
unpleasantly surprised by them'". ibid, p. 501
"Even in the explosive field of
international policy the Kaiser continued to make mischief without hindrance.
In March 1908, in a letter to the American President he refused to accept the
appointment of the career diplomat David J. Hill as ambassador in Berlin,
apparently because he did not consider him sufficiently wealthy. The news that
the Kaiser had written 'yet another of his ill-omened private letters, this
time to Roosevelt' provoked a fresh storm of indignation in the German press.
Spitzemberg regarded this new affair as 'the worst and most embarrassing
example of tactlessness' committed by Wilhelm II and bewailed the fact that 'no
bad experiences are of the least help with the Kaiser...'" ibid, p. 517
In 1908, Wilhelm gave an interview
to the American clergyman and journalist Dr. William Bayard Hale without the
knowledge of his Chancellor that was so belligerent and racist that those who
knew about it were scared that it would start a war if its contents ever became
public. Although the contents were publicly suppressed, diplomats obtained
copies of the interview. "Roosevelt now recornized the unredictability of
the 'jumpy' Kaiser as a danger to world peace. 'If he is indiscreet enough to
talk to a strange newspaerman in such a fashion it would be barely possible
that sometime he would be indiscreet enough to act on impulse in a way that
would jeopardize the peace;, he commented anxiously. From this time Elihu Root
also regarded Wilhelm II and his Reich as 'the great disturber of the
world.'" (ibid, p. 626)
"Wilhelm's attitude to the
press fluctuated between contempt and aggression. He was convinced that most
foreign newspapers were bribed by foreign Powers to denounce him and his Reich.
The press was of course completely in the hands of 'European pan-Judaism', he
declared in 1908. More than once, when he ws particularly angered by an
article, he threatened to send one of his Flügeladjutanten to the newspaper's
offices to shoot the editor." (ibid, p. 656)
"'The personal policy of the Kaiser is at the root of all
evil...If this manner of conducting policy by impromptu inspirations, whose
consequences are never thought through to their conclusion, does not cease, I
can see no hope. And with all due consideration for the monarchy, I do not know
whether a great, hard working people can today still be circumscribed by such
characteristics of a single person." (ibid, p. 657)
"He asserted that the fundamental cause of the growing concern
throughout Germany, not only among the perpetually carping 'horde' of
Socialists and Democrats but also among the 'hundreds of thousands of
warm-hearted, unreservedly pro-monarchical compatriots', lay in the autocratic
personality of the Kaiser, which was absolutely incomprehensible 'except in
terms of his firm belief in the divine right of Kings'. There was 'simply no
field left in which he did not demand recognition as an expert'. Wilhelm II
insited on keeping all the reins in his hands and on making all decisions, even
on minor matters,...And so he goes on treading a perilous path beside the
precipice of a dilettantism that destroys his prestige; he makes his own life
and that of others inordinately difficult; and above all he impedes the
machinery of government by seeking to be its driving force, whereas even the most
competent man, in his place, is only entitled to be its chief supervisor. The
penchant for over-hasty judgements, Wilhelm's impulsivity, the naïve
subjectivism . . . and finally the urge to assert supreme command everywhere,
an urge which refuses to tolerate anything but yes-men and keeps all strong
characters at bay, for its suspicion never sleeps;" (ibid, p. 658)
"Instead
of recognizing his mistakes and drawing lessons for the future from the
disaster caused by his quasi-absolutist manner of ruling, Wilhelm II still
refused to accept any blame. Although he had no alternative but to restrain
himself in his speeches for the time being, in his letters and converstaions -
above all with foreign sympathisers - he gave vent to extravagant tirades of
hatred for those who he considered had 'betrayed' him.... Among his entourage,
the feeling of sitting on a powder keg did not diminish, but increased
markedly." (ibid, p. 694-5)
"The
journalist had then asked Foreign Secretary Jagow, who did not know of the
speech, what was to be made of it, and had received the reply that His Majesty
had at the time been 'exceedingly nervous and irritable and that when he was in
that state he often said things which were better left unsaid, and to which
much attention should not be paid.' Krause for his part alerted the minister to
the enormous danger if a country was ruled by a sovereign 'who from sudden
accesses of nervousness or irritation was capable of speaking as he had done
before a lot of eager and probably hot-headed young officers.' To Goschen,
Krause added that the danger could arise from this was indeed great, but that
he thought it 'extremely improbable' that Wilhelm would ever actually steel
himself to declare war. However warlike his language might be, 'there was not
much fear that he would ever take it upon himself to declare war. . . except under
the very greatest pressure from his people.'" (ibid, p. 987)
"One week after the signing of
the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the Kaiser, believing that victory would now
follow in the west, declared any discussion of a 'peaceful future for the
world' to be 'beside the point!' and set out his own vision in these terms:
'God willing we shall be able to impose the coming peace upon our enemies,
which we must do. They will only sue for peace when they have been beaten so
badly that they have had enough. Once they admit to that they will have to
accept a peace which takes into account the new
and heavy loss of blood suffered by the German people solely as a result of their pigheadedness.
The peace must - if needs be at their
expense and without regard for their
feelings in the future - contain such
real guarantees for us that a world
combination such as the present one can never
again be put together against us. That is to say a genuine, proper, common
or garden peace of the kind that has so far always been signed after a
victorious war. There is no place in such a peace for dreams of human happiness
or humanitarian cosmopolitanism, only one's own
naked self-interest and the guarantee of one's own security and greatness must count. The vnaquished must submit to
his fate!' He rejected out of hand any
suggestion of an international order not based upon the military and economic
predominance of Germany and her allies. When the Berliner Tageblatt complained that there was no mention in the
Treaty of Brest-Litovsk of multilateral disarmament or arbitration or any kind
of League of Naitons, the monarch commented: 'because that is all rubbish! for
which sreious people don't give a toss!'" (ibid, p. 1161-2)
"The Kaiser, on the other hand,
was in their view a cold, self-centered egotist with 'the soul of a child' and
a tendency to hide behind grandiloquent bombast." (ibid, p. 1201)
"'All his life, evidently in
keeping with his entire personality, he must have lived in a world of his own
imagining which he then imposes upon reality and experience. . . The view of
the world which he made for himself and outlined for us was wrongheaded to a
grotesque, truly tragic degree.'" (ibid, p. 1215)
"If the Kaiser
read something in the newspapers that did not fit in with his own
preconceptions, then it was simply a lie. He showed no understanding whatever
of the problems facing Germany at home [after the war, when the Kaiser was
living in exile in Holland]. 'Each and every event is seen solely from the
point of view that every government since the revolution has been incompetent.
The only one to have governed well was 'He' himself. But he had been chased
away with black ingratitude. Now the Germans were getting their just deserts
and it was only right that they were suffering. He goes in for a great deal of
metaphorical sabre-rattling, everyone in Germany is so pitifully soft . . .
All this from the man who through his lack of energy, his hesitancy, his
sabre-rattling at the wrong time and place has done so much damage! But one can
now see how everything came about as it did. Especially if one add the Kaiser's
great receptiveness to flattery and adoration. The sins of his immediate
entourage among others in this regard are quite incalculable.'" (ibid, p.
1220)
While many if not most of young Trump's contemporaries were either
fighting in Vietnam, or fighting against the war in Vietnam, or risking their
lives registering Black voters in the south, or doing something for their
country, as President Kennedy requested, Trump was inheriting a large fortune
and lining his pockets with more in his family's real estate business, even by
discriminating against minorities in renting its properties. Trump's draft dodging and tax dodging shows he has a
grandiose opinion of himself, that he is
apart from other people and immune to their strictures
and circumstances. Trump ran a campaign where he claimed everything was
terrible and only he, like a monarch, could fix it. The only flaw in Trump's
argument is that if everything that came before was so terrible, how did the
United States end up being the sole superpower and the envy of the world?
The downfall of great people and nations, at
least since the time of the ancient Greeks, has almost always been caused by hubris, excessive pride or self-confidence,
arrogance, conceit, haughtiness, self-importance, egotism, pomposity, and superiority. In the case of
Kaiser Wilhelm II, it led to the greatest man-made
disaster in human history; World War I.
Let's hope it keeps that title.
Trump could be a
good president if he only understood politics, which he doesn't. He is an
entertainer. He even denies that he lost the popular vote, a clear call for compromise
by the voters. Instead, Trump prefers to sacrifice his agenda. He insults the
very legislators he needs to enact his bills, preferring the sound bite to passing
legislation.
In a book about the Supreme Court,
one justice said, "I would rather have a justice against me, than a sick
justice." The telling point is that sick people are intractable with their
illness dominating all other facets of their character. The salient issue is
whether Trump is sick. Clearly, he can not control himself on Twitter or when
speaking. The fact that what he says sabotages his putative program makes no impact.
This means he is either unwilling or, more worryingly, unable to learn from his
mistakes. The clear similarities between Kaiser Wilhelm II and Donald Trump
leads one to believe that Trump's personality is the problem. He has a kind of
Tourettes where there is a disconnect between his mouth and brain. He relishes
antagonizing minorities and clearly has difficulty dealing with women as
equals. Hillary, of course, was correct when she said that Trump did not have
the temperament to be president. Unfortunately, the fact that he is president
is her fault. I was going to conclude with the plea "God help us
all," but I'm an athiest. That means we must all get to work because no
one but ourselves and our own hard work is going to save us from Trump.
Return to Institute of Election Analysis Home
Page
[1] Bismarck's policy was basically to make Germany predominant in Europe and leave France, England, Russia, Japan and the United States to quarrel with each other over dominance in the colonies. Kaiser Wilhelm II, on the other hand, sought to make Germany a global power on a par with Great Britain. However, Germany's international ambitions precipitated conflict with its competitor European neighbors.