systematics

Bismarck’s Treaty System

Otto von Bismarck was Chancellor of the German Reich from 1871 until 1890. He is best known for a complex web of treaties with the other European powers – France, Great Britain, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Tsarist Russia. These treaties allowed Germany to grow industrially and militarily without provoking attack by any combination of those rival powers.

Bismarck’s diplomacy ending the Balkan Crisis of 1879 increased Imperial Germany’s international prestige, at the same time limiting Czarist Russia‘s influence in that region. Anticipating a frustrated Moscow, Bismarck wisely sought protection from Austro-Hungary via a mutual defense treaty signed in 1879, a treaty relationship which would hold until the end of the First World War.

In 1881 Bismarck pulled off another diplomatic coup by reducing tensions with Tsarist Russia and signing a treaty of mutual defense with Moscow, thereby preventing a possible anti-German coalition between Russia and France. Bismarck extended this system of alliances in 1882 by crafting a treaty involving the German Reich, Austro-Hungary and Italy, adding Rumania in 1883, defending against a possible French-British alliance against Germany.

Unfortunately, this complex, brilliantly devised system of treaties would fall apart not long after the young and impulsive Kaiser, Wilhelm II., took power and decided that Bismarck‘s time had come to an end. Wilhelm II. went on to antagonize and provoke Europe‘s powers in all the ways in which Bismarck had worked so hard to avoid. In August 1914 the Great War began.

Warning: It’s complicated.

Turned on its head

The Germans are criticized for “thinking things to death”, for overanalyzing. Deep analysis has a long and honored tradition in Germany, however. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, just as one example, wanted to turn Hegel’s philosophy “on its head.”

It is the goal of all great thinkers to explain reality as it is, and not the other way around, to force reality into their theories. All new situations and phenomena should be explainable, at a minimum placed in some logical perspective.

Thinking in systems, in connections and in mutual interdependencies is a red thread (a constant theme) in German philosophy, from Kant to Hegel to Max Weber on to Karl Popper and others of today. It is stressed in schools and universities in all subject areas.

Theoriekapitel

Theorie is theory. Kapitel is chapter, as in a book.

In German universities it is expected not only in B.A. and M.A. theses, but also in course term papers, that the second chapter, after the introduction, be devoted to theory, the so-called Theoriekapitel.

In it the author demonstrates that she is aware (conscious) of the complexity of the subject matter, that she understands that subject matter in the broader context of current research on it, and most importantly that she can durchdringen (penetrate) that complexity.

Complexity costs money !

March 13, 2015. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), Germany’s leading daily newspaper. Wirtschaft (business section). Page 20. An image takes up almost the entire bottom half of the page. All sorts of computer equipment wires tangled up in a ball.

The background colors are dark, heavy. “KOMPLEXITÄT. Kostet Unternehmen im Durchschnitt 10% ihres Gewinns.” (COMPLEXITY. Costs companies on average 10% of their annual profit)

Page 21. To the right. Another image. Again, just about the entire bottom half of the page. A young woman, perhaps thirty years old, sits in jeans and a blouse, with a tablet in her hands. Half-smiling, focused. The background colors are yellowy, bright, hopeful. “EINFACH. Hilft sparen.” (SIMPLICITY. Helps saving).

At the bottom left of the secon ad: the well-known SAP logo with their motto: Run Simple. SAP. German. One of the world’s leading enterprise software companies. The message: We know how to handle complexity. Let us do it for you.

“Thought too short!“

If a German wants to discredit the statements made by another person, he can say (among other things): Das ist von Ihnen zu kurz gedacht! – literally that was “thought too short”, meaning that was not (fully) thought through.

That kind of criticism is damaging even if it is not backed up by specific points. For it accuses the other party of not having considered all possible factors in a given situation, in a decision made, in an action taken. The person criticized did not adequately analyze the situation, did not take a systematisch approach.

That certain (unimportant) factors should be ignored is not relevant to the critique. The criticism sticks: the other person didn’t consider the connections and interdependencies.

“Academics don’t like journalists“

It’s certainly a cliché in Germany to say that academics don’t like journalists. German universities are no longer just ivory towers of knowledge, for degree programs in Wissenschaftsjournalismus – literally academic-journalism – are helping the broader public to understand complex academic and scientific material.

More and more academics, including those from the natural sciences, are teaming up with journalists not only to communicate their findings, but also to gain public relations value for their themselves and their work.

Nonetheless, there are many academics who cringe at thought of being interviewed by journalists. They find it painful to hear from journalists that their work needs to be communicated publikumsgerecht – understandable for the public, for the “man on the street.”

For the academic, for the scientist, this can only mean dumbing down. They fear that the complexity will be so oversimplified that the public will not understand the overall message, its interconnections and mutual interdependencies.

Which is why German academics will always preface their statements with: “If put in a simplified way, the ….” or “In reality it is far more complex than this, but ….”