• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent is it possible to associate the regimes of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler with social and political modernization?

Extracts from this document...


To what extent is it possible to associate the regimes of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler with social and political modernization? Both the Fascist and Nazi regimes of Mussolini and Hitler undoubtedly changed the world and the course of modern history forever with their vast plans for state expansion, social change and their newly acquired taste for empire building. Both men had ambitious ideas which they implemented in their countries each believing their own right-wing ideology to be the true path to greatness and glory for their respective empires, and both men bought about huge social and political change within their regimes, however one must remember that although Hitler and Mussolini were both right-wing dictators, they were two very different men with differing ideological perspectives and it is important not to lump the two together when discussing or comparing their regimes or policies as many historians have tended to do in the past. To begin with I will examine the Italian dictatorship of Benito Mussolini and assess the extent to which his Fascist regime achieved social and political modernization. It is interesting to note that at this present time many thinkers in Italy are asking whether one should be wary of Berlusconi, as he too, like Mussolini has come to power as a charismatic politician promising hope and new policies to Italians, and whether he too may be hiding more radical policies up his sleeve and waiting for the right time to implement them. ...read more.


when they were caught up in the crossfire between KPD and SA members in the events of 'Bloody Sunday' in Altona on 17th July 1932.2 At this tense time of civil unrest, coupled with massive unemployment and widespread poverty, Hitler with his talk of restoring hope and pride to a weakened Germany was what many people saw as the antidote to Germany's disease. In 1931 Heinrich Bruning was the Chancellor of Germany, trying to sort out problem after problem, whilst President Hindenberg was becoming increasingly frustrated at Bruning's seeming inability to deal with Germany's economic and social problems. German's were not satisfied with the government, something highlighted when Bruning travelled around Germany his train had to have the blinds permanently drawn as whenever crowds caught sight of him they would often throw rocks. Bruning's political career abruptly ended when he was wrongly identified with plans put forward by the Minister for Labour, Adam Stegerwald, which included proposals to nationalize heavy industry. His enemies accused him of Bolshevism and after a curt interview President Hindenberg asked for his resignation. His replacment was Franz von Papen, a petty aristocrat with un-democratic views. After making no headway with new policies and being roundly humiliated in parliament by the Communists, Papen secretly met Hitler on the 18th January 1933. He agreed to let Hitler have the Chancellorship, in exchange for Papen becoming Vice-Chancellor, leaving Papen well positioned for when Hitler cracked under the strains of power. ...read more.


were friendly with the Nazis were able to buy up struggling regional newspapers so that eventually one company Eher Verlag and its associates controlled 82.5% of the German press. There was now a Reich Association of the German Press which all journalists were now part of, excluding the thirteen hundred Jewish and 'Marxist' journalists that had been sacked or fled the country by 1935. Only those who passed the Nazis racial and political screening could work as journalists at all, and they could not write anything even slightly critical of the government for fear of severe punishment. Under the October 1933 Editors Law the responsibilities of editors to the government became absolute and now whatever was published became the editors own legal responsibility, therefore placing the onus upon editors themselves not to let anything critical become published. The Nazis, unlike Mussolini and the Italian Fascists, had complete and utter control over the German media, and through such strong repressive measures they were able to achieve the changes they wanted to bring about. However although the Italian Fascists did arrest and execute opponents, their repression was not on the same scale as the Nazis, and I believe this was why they could not achieve the same level of change and modernization as the Nazis. To put it simply I belive the more repressive the regime and the more fear amongst the population, the easier it is to engineer social and political change. 1 www.wikepedia.com 2 The Third Reich- Michael Burleigh ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. The Rise and Fall of Adolf Hitler.

    Use between 15 and 25 sentences. I think that Hitler would solve the crisis between Israel and the PLO by killing the Jewish people. Hitler believed that the Jews were inferior, and that they should die. In his book Mein Kampf, Hitler described how Germany would become "Lord of the Earth."

  2. Hitlers Germany

    Marching bands, swarms of fluttering flags, shouts of Heil, the play of spotlights-all were precisely orchestrated to produce the maximum emotional effects on the crowd. Hitler's own rallies were except well managed. A Hamburg schoolteacher gave this impression of a rally she attended: "The Fuehrer is coming!"

  1. Evaluate historical comparisons of Hitler and Stalin and their regimes

    She claimed that, "the population had been atomised and mobilised through a ubiquitous system of terror and sophisticated propaganda techniques."2 This ability to manipulated society is fundamental in the understanding of the term totalitarianism. Arendt was able to popularise the term totalitarianism to link fascism and Nazism with communism.3 Arendt's

  2. How and why did the Weimar Governments collapse between October 1929 and January 1933?

    NSDAP, who won 37.4% of the vote, making them the largest party in the Reichstag by a wide margin. This meant that with a combined 52% of the vote and a seat majority, the two parties that virulently opposed the political system were now the most influential in the Reichstag.

  1. To what extent do you consider that Hitler and the Nazis had achieved their ...

    Women where important to Hitler in his Volksgemeinschaft because they insured the growth of the population in preparation for war, he wanted all women to fit in the society as mothers and wives of the Aryan race who had many children.

  2. To what extent was Wilhelmine Germany an entrenched authoritarian state?

    His commercial treaties which led to tariff reduction, although economically was very sensible, was actually seen as a great threat by Junkers such as those of the Agrarian League, who advised the Kaiser against socialism. They pushed the Kaiser to demand Caprivi to draw up new anti-socialist legislation, and when he declined to do so it led to his resignation.

  1. How significant was foreign influence in shaping Italian political and social development in the ...

    As David Kertzer conveys, "the election of Pius IX had, in particular, been welcomed by those liberal Catholics who sought to reconcile Italian independence with loyalty to the Church,"[9] creating a generation of Neo-Guelfs. Pius gave freedom to the press, created a civil guard and set up a Consulta, a state council which non-churchmen could belong to.

  2. How far did Russia undergo economic and political modernization from 1881-1905?

    The sheer size of Russia meant that communicating from one end of Russia to the other was virtually impossible. This was because there was a lack of transport, for example there was only 1,500 miles of track where as England managed to have 15,000 miles of track.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work