Hitler and the Munich Agreement. The Munich Agreement was the final policy of appeasement that showed Hitler he could take over Europe.
Question 4: The Munich Agreement In the 1920s and 1930s, Adolf Hitler began his rise to power. Intent on making Germany become a major national power, Hitler had to overcome the terms that limited Germany's power in the Treaty of Versailles. Knowing that he could not overcome them through negotiation, Hitler deviously and subtly began to violate the terms of the Treaty of Versailles to restore Germany's glory. One of the most effective ways Hitler achieved this was by utilizing the antiwar sentiments of the other nations of Europe; countries such as Great Britain and France were devastated by World War 1 and would try to avoid another war at any cost. In 1938, Hitler made an aggressive claim to the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. Leaders from Germany, France, Italy, and Great Britain met in Munich to discuss Hitler's radical claim, and the Munich Agreement was the result of this conference. As Churchill stated, the Munich Agreement was "a disaster of the first magnitude" (Source D); through the policy of appeasement, the nations of Europe helped Hitler succeed in his quest for dominance, further increasing German ambition and paving the road for World War 2. Fearful of starting another war, Great Britain and the other nations of Western Europe engaged in the policy of appeasement. Appeasement is when one nation pacifies another by giving in to the other one's
Hitler's rise to Chancellor in 1933.
History Coursework Hitler's rise to Chancellor in 1933 There were many reasons why Hitler was able to take power in 1933. Many of the reasons were either long-term or short-term. Germany was unstable at this time and after the formation of the Weimar republic, the constitution became weak. The Weimar republic was successful for some time but people always felt resentment towards the republic due to the Long-term implications of the First World War and the Treaty of Versailles. The reparations that Germany had to pay through the Treaty meant that it was in economic crisis. This helped to cause weakness in the democracy and although the Weimar Republic did have a period of recovery between 1924 and 1929 the death of Stresseman and the Wall Street Crash helped to bring it down again. The republic was weak, crises in a country do happen as they did in Germany but the government has to be able to survive. If it can't survive it leaves the way open for people such as Hitler to work their way to power. The German people didn't want communism, which was the other option so they turned to Nazism, as it was the only alternative. People feared that, since they had established themselves from the lower or skilled working classes and they now had a small stake in the world, economic chaos brought about by Communism would drag them back down the ladder. The wall street crash had led
The Fall of the Tsar
The Tsar and his ancestors has been running Russia as an autocracy for over 300 years. Running the worlds biggest country as an autocracy with a very incompetant Tsar was inevitably a recipie for disaster. Running a 6592800km² country single handedly was obviously never going to work. Tsar Nicholas II hated people giving him advice, even if it was good advice. He clearly didn't like people who were cleverer then he was. For example, the Tsar replaced Goremykin with Stolypin as Prime Minister. Stolypin used harsh methods of ruling which ended up with good results; however, Stolypin was assassinated just before Nicholas was going to fire him. The Tsar was also a very ignorant man who would ignore almost all advice he was given, even if it was good advice. Nicholas would only ever listen to his friend and people who were in great power, who funnily enough were his friends. The second reason as to why the Tsar fell from power was World War 1. The Russian Army was terribly run. The Tsar himself had chosen the Army Generals based on their status and friendship to him. They had to army experience and almost no idea what they were doing. They were very poorly equiped and some soldiers went into battle without guns. They were instructed: "If a man near you dies, pickup his gun and use it." Because Russia was so big and the army generals were so unexperienced, they used soldiers
How and why did the Tsarist regime survive the 1905 revolution?
How and why did the Tsarist regime survive the 1905 revolution? First of all to understand how the Tsarist regime survived in 1905 it is necessary to answer the question what happened in 1905. Then it is possible to see how the Tsar combated these problems. In the years before 1905 there was increasing social turmoil caused by rapid industrialisation: There was no legal way of expressing political views (no Parliament), there was a discontented and oppressed working class, and a desperate and poverty stricken peasantry. The middle classes were discontent because of the absence of a political voice for the vast population. The peasants were poor because they owned no land for themselves and of poor harvests and heavy taxing by the Tsar to pay for industrialisation. The working classes had to work in very poor working conditions, for very long hours and for very little pay. Therefore most sectors of Russian society were in opposition to the state. Only the gentry, the state-dependant industrialists and the army supported the regime. It is not surprising, therefore, that three illegal, political parties stemmed from the situation. One such party was the Social Democrats (1895), which followed the teachings of Marx, believing in a proletarian revolution. In 1903 the Social Democrats split into the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks believing in a small well organised
How did the Spartacist Uprising, the Weimar Constitution, the Treaty of Versailles, the Kapp Putsch, hyperinflation and the invasion of Ruhr cause problems for the new Weimar Republic?
How did the Spartacist Uprising, the Weimar Constitution, the Treaty of Versailles, the Kapp Putsch, hyperinflation and the invasion of Ruhr cause problems for the new Weimar Republic? The Weimar Constitution was published in 1919 and was praised as one of the most advanced democracies in Europe, the people voted the leaders into office and proportional representation was used to determine the number of seats each party was allocated. The Spartacist uprising made it impossible for the new government to meet in Berlin. The Spartacists organised strikes and riots in Berlin and therefore it was not believed to be safe for the new leaders to meet in the capital so they chose the quiet town of Weimar and drew up what is now known as the Weimar Constitution. Due to the Spartacist uprising the republic appeared weak and defenceless when under attack and this meant support was hard to gain from the working class members of Germany who had once supported the Spartacists. The army also gave little support to the republic as Ebert promised not to change the army, it therefore remained as it had under the rule of the Kaiser, this made the republic appear weaker still to the German people. In June 1919 the Treaty of Versailles was signed, its terms horrified both the German people and the government. The vast majority of the German people felt the treaty was much too harsh and
Failures of the League
'By failing to resist aggression in the 1930s, the League of Nations made Hitler's work easy.' How fair is this judgement on the League in the 1930s? I think that the statement is partially fair. The League was too slow when making decisions and were prepared to give large portions of land (Abyssinia) to other countries to keep the peace. The League made some very big mistakes, but the conditions the League was in were very bad. The Leagues' main members were Britain and France; both had just fought a big war and were in not much position to stop countries invading other countries. The Manchuria crisis was the first biggest problem the League experienced. The 1929 Depression hit Japan hard. The civilian government found that it had no solutions to the problems presented by the world-wide depression and to the army the civilian government looked weak. Many people admired the more robust response of the army. The unemployed of Japan looked to the strength of the army to assist their plight rather than to what weak politicians were doing. The voices of senior army generals were heard and they argued for a campaign to win new colonies abroad so that the industries there could be exploited for Japan. The most obvious target was a full-scale invasion of Manchuria. Japan was becoming increasingly crowded due to its limited size as a nation and its rapidly increasing population.
How valuable is the southwell workhouses a source of evidence of how far they were treated in early Victorian times?
How valuable is the southwell workhouses a source of evidence of how far they were treated in early Victorian times? The southwell workhouse was built in 1834, introducing a harsh and revolutionary system that was designed to cut the cost of caring for the poor. This system was later adopted adopted across a national network of over 600 workhouses. In this essay I will explain how life was in the southwell workhouse and how paupers were treated there back in the 19th century. The workhouse was built in southwell after the poorlaw amendment act was passed in 1834. The building housed 158 inmates and was designed specifically segregate the different classes. This gave the effect of a prison building. When you come up to the workhouse you are left with a path down the left hand side of the building which was known as paupers lane. Here the paupers would walk until they were faced with the massive building where they would be working. Before entering they would have to go through an interview and a short medical. After this they were issued with a workhouse uniform and then put into there category.Segregation was a harsh reality of workhouse life especially if families and small children were seperated. The workhouse was bought for £250,000 in the summer of 1997.The national trust purchased the building in order to restore it as a museum. After its restoration of around 12
Why Did They Build The Berlin Wall In 1961?
Why Did They Build The Berlin Wall In 1961? The Berlin Wall was built in 1961 and for twenty-eight years it separated friends, families, and a nation. A lot of suffering began for Germany when World War II started, but by the end of the war Germany had a disaster waiting to happen. After WWII was over Germany was divided into four parts, America, Great Britain and France all controlled the three divisions that were formed in the Western half then Eastern half was controlled by the USSR. The Western divisions eventually united to make a federal republic, while the Eastern divisions became communist. One of the many reasons why the Berlin wall was built was because of the tension between America and the Soviet and the fact they both had different beliefs and ideologies. First of all America was a capitalist country. This meant they believed that businesses were aloud to make a greater profit and to be more successful than others. On the other hand there was the Soviet what was a communist country this meant that they believed every one should be equal and the government got the profits. The differences caused by the beliefs were ghastly because both countries disagreed with each other just causing more tension and most people in the Soviet disagreed with being a communist country and this made them wanting to leave because of this so therefore this may of lead to the wall
What reasons did the H.S.C.A have in 1979 for suggesting that president Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy in 1963
Question 3 Thomas Boddington What reasons did the H.S.C.A have in 1979 for suggesting that president Kenndy was the victim of a conspiracy in 1963 There are many the theories of how President Kennedy was assassinated and there are many people who still don't believe the Warren Commission's report. Unlike the Warren Commission the H.S.C.A were able to conduct a more thorough investigation, most likely because they had more time to come to a verdict. In this essay I cant say who really did kill Americas youngest president but I can say why the H.S.C.A and many other people don't believe the Warren Commission. In the Warren Commission report probably their biggest mistake was disregarding key eyewitnesses who they considered to be incompatible and inconsistent. Although they rely on witnesses saying that they saw a rifle being fried from the Texas schoolbook depository to locate the position of the assassin. Out of 500 witnesses at the event, only 90 were questioned and 58 of those said that they saw smoke and heard gun shot sounds from the grassy knoll. These reports didn't collaborate with the Warren Commission. They said all 58 witnesses were mistaken This might just have something to do with the fact that they don't collaborate with there single assassin theory. Many witnesses weren't even
Source based work on Prohibition.
Prohibition Question F Some of sources A to J do not suggest an inevitable failure of Prohibition where as some of them you cannot use as evidence because they were published after or during Prohibition. I think that sources A, B, E, I and J all suggest that Prohibition was inevitably going to fail where as sources C, D, F, G and H all do not suggest that inevitably Prohibition was going to fail. Source A is a historian talking about Prohibition in 1973. It says firstly about the causes of Prohibition, which make it seem that Prohibition was not going to fail. By saying things like 'The bad influence of saloons' and 'Most important of all was the moral fervour inspired by the War to Make The World Safe for Democracy'' make it sound that this article would have been strongly for the introduction of Prohibition. However in the second paragraph he uses hindsight to try and prove that it would have been inevitable with lines such as 'For no earlier law had gone against the daily customs, habits and desires of so many Americans.' Therefore I believe that this source suggests that the failure or Prohibition was inevitable. Source B is a historian talking about Prohibition in 1979. The first paragraph is about the causes and events of Prohibition so, as with Source A, this paragraph is saying that Prohibition was not going to fail. Quotations such as '...great evils of the times -
