How far do you agree with this judgement?
In 1914, as the First World War began, many would argue that the conflict had narrowed political divisions in Germany as all political parties were united, with the common aim of winning the Great War. However, despite this initial unification, as the war progressed, it proceeded to politically polarise Germany as different political perspectives emerged, desiring many contrasting things, the major contrast being between left wing groups that wanted the war to end, and right wing groups which wanted to continue with the war until Germany had won. Therefore, by 1918, the First World War had very much increased rather …show more content…
This was a political truce, agreed to by all of the major German political parties, to put their politics aside and unite to support the war effort. As part of this truce, all power was transferred from the Reichstag and given to the Bundesrat. Eventually this would develop into the ‘silent dictatorship’ of Hindenburg and Ludendorff who effectively became the most powerful men in Germany as all political and military decisions came from them. Although there were slight constraints on their powers, from August 1916, they decided on the strategy of the war and how Germany should proceed and their views superseded the contrasting ideas of Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg. It is clear that this system of Burgfrieden, where political standpoints had been thrown aside, would have narrowed political divisions as it seriously reduced the amount of opposition to the war that might have been expected from different groups such as the SPD. It could also be argued that this semi-dictatorship of Hindenburg and Ludendorff would also have narrowed political division as these two people would have all political control and stop diverse political debate, allowing for decisions to be made quickly. However, as all resources were put into ensuring territorial gain and military measures, this did attract some