To what extent was Wilhelmine Germany an entrenched authoritarian state?

The question of whether Wilhelmine Germany was an entrenched authoritarian state has been the subject of much debate, namely the dynamics of the power of the Kaiser over the Reichstag and his chancellors, the Kaiser’s own personality and beliefs, and the challenges to the Kaiser’s rule and the rise of alternative parties. In this essay, I will discuss how the view that the Kaiser held the majority of the power within Germany, although he was constrained by certain obstacles, such as the 1871 Constitution.
It could be argued that Wilhelmine Germany was in fact an entrenched authoritarian state. The constitutional balance of powers clearly demonstrates this. The Kaiser’s powers within the constitution show that he had the constitutional authority to rule as an autocratic leader, as he had the ability to appoint and dismiss the chancellor, dissolve the Reichstag, direct foreign policy, and command the armed forces. The Daily Telegraph Affair highlights the fact that the Kaiser was the most politically dominant figure in Germany, as in the interview the Kaiser gave the impression he wanted to form an alliance with Great Britain, thus demonstrating how he, himself, directed foreign policy without the consultation of the Reichstag. Constitutionally, the Kaiser was required to consult with the Reichstag, before acting on his own constitutional authority to propose foreign policy. The Daily Telegraph Affair highlights both the Kaiser’s own entrenched authoritarianism, in the sense that he has the right to propose foreign policy, and also, the fact that he ignored the Reichstag’s constitutional right to be consulted, implying that he is the more superior body. To further this, the Kaiser also had the ability to appoint and dismiss the Chancellor of Germany. After the Daily Telegraph Affair, Bulow