How far do you agree that 'the Appeasers' were guilty men?

Authors Avatar by vdshjffjdhgdfh (student)
How far do you agree that ‘the Appeasers’ were guilty men

The term ‘appeasement’ has been used to describe the response of British foreign policy makers in the 1930s to the rise of the Nazi Germany as a dictator power. It is seen as a policy of making one-sided concessions, often at the expense of other countries with nothing offered in return except promises of better behaviour in the future, in a vain attempt to satisfy the aspirations of Hitler. Because the policy ultimately failed so spectacularly in its primary purpose of avoiding war, its practitioners, ‘the Appeasers’, have been the subject of much criticism and derision and hence been branded guilty men. I believe this is a fair judgement of the group of men, in particular Neville Chamberlain, who let politics get in the way of what, was clearly the wrong action to take and who are responsible for all of the lives lost in the Second World War which ultimately needn’t have happened in the first place.

After World War One both the British leaders and the public vividly remembered the horrific experiences of it and wished to avoid this at all cost. This meant that the public was in favour of any policy which would potentially avoid or at least delay war and so voted for a Party which followed the policy of ‘appeasement’. Winston Churchill before being elected as Prime Minister was very unpopular as he was vehemently against appeasement and warned that it would encourage Hitler to become more aggressive and strong enough to wage war. However in hindsight he was right and should have been listened to but he wasn’t until it was too late. Neville Chamberlain was voted in mainly on the basis of ‘appeasement’ and therefore was obligated to let Hitler do what he wanted, not because it was the best thing to do, but because it was what the public wanted him to do.
Join now!

Neville Chamberlain put too much trust in Hitler’s promises and was naïve in thinking that he could pacify Germany’s aggression if he let her achieve all her aims. Hitler always went back on his promises and the flawed policy of appeasement was based on the mistaken idea that Hitler was trustworthy. If he and his other Cabinet Ministers had stood up to Hitler than he could have been stopped a long time before he was in a position to wage war. If you consider the amount Hitler was able to get away with (allowing Germany to rearm, remilitarise ...

This is a preview of the whole essay