Hitler - Jews
How did Hitler's policy affect the lives of the Jews? Hitler possessed strong anti-Semitic views for many reasons. He and fellow Nazis were strong believers in Social Darwinism, which was survival of the fittest; Hitler called the superior race in his opinion, the "Aryans". He therefore believed that the Jews should be eliminated. Also, anti-Semitism had a long history, so the Jews were an easy scapegoat for Germany's problems that Hitler could use. In addition to that, the Jewish people were often very successful and wealthy, so Germans thought that they were stealing money from them, and in many instances were jealous of them. So, Hitler adopted strong anti-Semitic policies; they were not the most popular of his decisions, but they were carried out with great strength. There were 5 main stages to the persecution of the Jews: * Livelihoods were attacked, * They were singled out, * Nuremburg Laws, * Violence, * Final Solution. At first, the Jews' livelihoods were attacked. Many of them were sacked from their jobs, such as those who were teachers and doctors. They weren't allowed to serve on a jury or work with Aryans. The next stage was more serious, which was when the Jews were singled out. Their passports were stamped with a "J", and in public they were forced to sit on separate yellow benches. Furthermore, their shops had a Star of David painted on them, and Jews
Ma Vacance (My Holiday)
<<School_Name>> Le collège qui s'appelle <<School_Name>> était construit en 1942. Au début, il y avait 100 élèves et cinq professeurs. Pourtant, maintenant il y a neuf cent élèves, cinquante professeurs et quarante-huit classes environ. Le collège fait 200 mètres sur 300. On y peut trouver beaucoup de plants et d'animaux exceptionnels dans leur réserve de faune. Les élèves de <<School_Name>> ont cinq leçons par jour. D'habitude un élève a trois cours le matin et deux cours l'après-midi; généralement, un cours dure une heure mais rarement, s'il y a une interruption (comme un exercice d'incendie), il dure plus petit que habituel. Au collège, un journée typique est: COURS 1 9h10 - 10h10 COURS 2 0h15 - 11h10 COURS 3 1h30 - 12h30 COURS 4 2h35 - 13h30 COURS 5 4h15 - 15h15 Lundi ----------> L' ANGLAIS L'EMT ----------> LA GÉO LE FRANÇAIS ----------> ----------> LES MATHS Mardi ----------- L' ANGLAIS LES TEXTILES TION - LES MATHS LA CITOYEN-NETÉ ER----- ----------- LE SPORT Mercredi L'APPEL LA PHYSIQUE LA DESSIN RÉCRÉA LES TEXTILES LE FRANÇAIS DEJEUN L'APPEL L'HISTORIE - GÉO Jeudi ------- L' HISTOIRE LES MATHS --LA LA RELIGION LA BIOLOGIE ---LE ------ L' ANGLAIS Vendredi <---------- LA MUSIQUE L'ART DRAMA-TIQUE <--------- LA CHIMIE L' HISTORIE <----------
The Scott Report and the Making of the Modern Countryside - 'How penetrating was the Scott report's analysis of rural problems and what were the consequences of its recommendations?'
The Scott Report and the Making of the Modern Countryside 'How penetrating was the Scott report's analysis of rural problems and what were the consequences of its recommendations?' Nineteenth century Britain violently swung from being a predominantly agricultural society to being the "workshop of the world". Such a dramatic shift led to ramifications in all British factions especially the countryside. The Scott Report otherwise known as the Majority Report was published in 1942. It summed up the complex changes that had been taking place in rural England during the preceding half-century, and set out a series of plans and recommendations for the government to subsequently follow. The Report has been sited as the most influential document concerning the English countryside of the twentieth century. It has, however, not been without criticism. Many have been damning in their condemnation of the catastrophic impact it has had on the countryside in the following half century. Why is this so? The Scott Report was primarily the product of four men; Scott, Stamp, Hudson and Reath. The integrity of each has been called into question as much as the Report itself. Questions have even arisen whether the alleged author Scott actually wrote the report. Each contributor's bias, some would claim, is clearly visible in the message the report conveys. Hudson, for example, the Minister of
