>Because apparently replacing the Kaiser and reducing the role to a purely ceremonial one is worse than giving a president completely unchecked power.

You are comparing a hypothetical figurehead to a president that had a "Become a dictator" button on their desk. What are you doing?

Oh look it's one of those people that can't understand sarcasm without /S

The whole point of that sentence is that it's the direct opposite of the truth.

She was a barbarian.

Those who seek to seize power without the consent of the governed are nothing more than thugs. The Freikorps were entirely justified in putting her ambitions to rest.

So by your own admission, they didn't start the war. Great.

> Wilhelm II is mass murderer. Getting rid of him and his monarchy justifies almost any action of anyone in this period of time. They slaugthered the right pig.

Proceeds to glorify the system that directly resulted in Nazi Germany. Because apparently replacing the Kaiser and reducing the role to a purely ceremonial one is worse than giving a president completely unchecked power.

The german monarchy didn't cause the first world war. Also it's abolition is why they ended up with a braindead constitution. Destabilising the country, getting Article 48 anywhere near the constitution and creating a massive power vaccum on the political right was completely disasterous. She deserves nothing but derision.