Explain why the depression of 1929 was a godsend for the Nazi Party
Explain why the depression of 1929 was a 'godsend' for the Nazi Party Of all European countries, none was hit harder than Germany by the stock market crash of October 1929. Germany, who was still suffering from the Treaty of Versailles, had borrowed very large sums from American banks, with much of the money repayable either on demand or at short notice. These loans were of course recalled, and bankruptcies in Germany rose sharply from the start of 1930. Unemployment rose sharply, too. The German economy plummeted with the stock market and the situation Germany found itself in resulted in even more faith being lost in the Weimar constitution. This situation was a godsend for the Nazi Party as it enabled them to gain public support. Having lost faith in what they already felt was an indecisive Government, and after the 'stab in the back' myth having been circulated throughout the country, Germany became increasingly hard to govern. Hitler, an inspiring and energetic speaker, took this opportunity to present himself and the Nazi party to the German people. Showing himself as a strong leader, he promised to abolish the Treaty of Versailles and restore Germany to power. This was one of the ways in which the Great Depression aided the Nazis. Because of the people of Germany falling into poverty and despair and being eager for help, Hitler's talk of a new Germany and his
Why was the Weimar Republic so unpopular with many Germans between 1919 and 1923?
Why was the Weimar Republic so unpopular with many Germans between 1919 and 1923? After The War a new type of government was set up in Germany. This was the Weimar Republic. Between 1919 and 1923 it had to deal with many problems. 1919 saw the Spartacist Rebellion and the new government was forced to agree to the unpopular Treaty of Versailles. In 1920 the Kapp Putsch succeeded in taking over the government for a while. In 1921 Germany began to pay reparations and inflation began to get out of control. Two years later France and Belgium invaded the Ruhr and the hyperinflation was now out of control. The NSDAP, led by Adolf Hitler and General Ludendorff, tried to take over the government at this time. This bad start had three main causes. The First reason why the Weimar Republic started badly was that there were political problems. Some people were very upset that the Kaiser had been forced to leave. This was a politically a bad start because it showed that some people would have preferred to have had the previous political system. The communists disliked the new republic because not much would change. The workers would still be poor and the rich would still be rich. They wanted the workers to have power. This contributed to the Weimar Republic's early unpopularity because there are a group of people (the communists) who know that they will not agree with the key policies
Was Nicholas II responsible for his own downfall?
Was Nicholas II responsible for his own downfall? Nicholas II acted as an autocratic monarch rather than a constitutional leader, and this was a factor in his eventual downfall and abdication. Other factors included, him leaving Russia in the incapable hand of his wife, Alexandra, who herself was greatly influenced by Rasputin. The 'Holy Man' Rasputin was becoming more and more popular with Alexandra for helping their only son, Alexis's with his haemophilia, and his strange but powerful brand of spirituality certainly affected both Alexandra and Nicholas. It could be argued that Nicholas was himself responsible for allowing the power of Rasputin to extend so far and to influence his political decisions. Historians are in agreement that Nicholas lacked the necessary skills and qualities to rule a rapidly changing country. There were however factors outside of Nicholas' control, including his son's illness, that he could not be held directly responsible for. Indeed Russia was a huge country which was very hard to govern even for the most competent Tsar. One of the first factors which Nicholas was responsible for was his weak character and the fact that he allowed Alexandra to be so dominant. She encouraged him to hold on to his absolute power when a change in his style of leadership may have been a more politically useful tactic. A very significant contributing
Catholic discrimination in Northern Ireland in terms of Housing and Employment
There has been a long history of violence, prejudice, and discrimination between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, particularly highlighted throughout the 1960s, when Catholics were discriminated against by the Protestant Stormont Government in both employment and housing. Hence, in order to understand in what ways and how much it occurred, both these areas must be investigated. Firstly, one must look at how the Catholics were discriminated against in terms of employment, and to what extent this occurred. In the public sector, Catholics suffered great difficulties being employed, as there appears to have been some bias towards employing Protestants, especially in senior levels of the civil service. For example, in a report by the Cameron Commission in 1969, it is stated, "[As of October 1968] In County Fermanagh, no senior council posts, (and relatively few others) were held by Catholics" and according to the Sunday Times, in the same county, in 1961 "322 of the [370] posts, including the top ones, were filled with Protestants. This shows how during the 1960s, the Catholics in Fermanagh did not have many jobs at a high level in the public sector. This is particularly interesting because the majority of people in Fermanagh were Catholics, hence highlighting the extent of their discrimination. The Sunday Times also wrote that in Derry "of 177 salaried employees,
Does General Haig deserve the title Butcher of the Somme?
Does General Haig deserve the title 'Butcher of the Somme'? In this essay I will discus whether General Haig deserves to be remembered as 'the butcher of the Somme'. General Haig's title of 'the butcher of the Somme' originated after the First World War, when, due to large number of casualties Britain suffered from the war and mostly the Somme. The people of Britain wanted someone to blame. This was a coping mechanism in which people could deal with the loss of the 'lost generation'. Arguably Haig does deserve his nickname. This is because Haig sent thousands of men to their deaths continuously after his war efforts seemed not to be working. For instance 60,000 soldiers died in the first day alone in the battle of the Somme. The reason that so many people died was that Haig ordered his men to walk across no-mans land. They were easy targets for the German machine guns. However Haig assisted Britain in winning the war and although he did so with tremendous loss of life, these men did not die pointlessly. They died to protect their families and everyone else on the home front, and they died to prevent Britain from becoming a German Nation. Haig was also faced with an almost impossible task of winning the war in the quickest means possible. Haig was under constant pressure from the government to have a large victory to boost morale. This factor as well as the fact that
Most German people benefitted from Nazi rule 1933-39 Do you agree? Explain you answer.
Eloise Sear 11P Hitler's Germany 1929-39 b) 'Most German people benefitted from Nazi rule 1933-39" Do you agree? Explain you answer. (12 marks) Between 1933 and 1939, it is clear that whilst some people benefitted from Nazi rule, others did not. However, most German people accepted Nazi rule due to the benefits it did bring. One group of people that did benefit were the unemployed. Hitler reduced unemployment from 6 million in 1933 to just 300,000 in 1939 by starting huge public work schemes including planting forests, and building hospitals and schools. The construction of the autobahns created work for 80,000 men. A further fall in unemployment came when Hitler brought about rearmament and introduced conscription. Although the newly employed were earning little, at least they were receiving money. To people who had been unemployed and starving, 'work and bread' was something amazing. Also, the schemes meant that new facilities were being constructed in Germany benefitting the German people further. However, it did come at a cost. To achieve this, many Jews and women were sacked and replaced with non-Jewish men. People who were already working also benefitted. Workers were allowed to go on holidays for the first time. Hitler's 'joy through work' scheme allowed people to have free trips to the German coast and go to place like Norway. The scheme
Why did the Germans hate the treaty of Versailles?
Why did the Germans hate the treaty of Versailles? Germans hated the Treaty of Versailles because they did not understand they were responsible for starting the war neither they felt as they had lost. Another reason that the German hated the treaty was the terms of the treaty, which created political and economic problems. This includes territorial restriction on Germany, military Restrictions on Germany, territorial losses, reparations, League of Nations etc. As a result, a piece of land was split in centre of Germany for Poland to have a coastline, which weaken Germany from East Prussia (East Prussia had been a source of great revenue and the political elite for Germany). Another territorial restriction on Germany that the Germans did not expect was that the Saar coal fields were to be given to France for fifteen years. This was a great source of coal for the Germans and losing it meant that the Germans didn't have a supply of coal and raw materials for its industries. There are many more reasons that the Germans hated the treaty of Versailles. When the treaty was announced on the 7th May 1919, Germans were horrified. One of the reasons why they were horrified was Germany had been blamed unfairly for starting the war. However, the allies could blame Bosnia for killing Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, in Sarajevo. Germany was not allowed to
To what extend do you agree with Rhodes view that the British Empire was beneficial to both Britain and the colonies?
This term in history we have been learning about the British Empire and what impacts the British Empire had on the countries they conquered and on the world itself. The British Empire was the largest Empire in history and for a period of time it was the world's globally strongest countries. By 1921 the British Empire was in command of a population of about 458 million people roughly one quarter of the world's population. The land that Britain had conquered covered about a quarter of the earth's surface area (14.2 million squares miles. The legacy that is the British Empire is well known throughout the world; at the peak of its power, people often said" The sun never sets on the British Empire, "As the sun will always be shining on one of Britain's colonies all over the world." However people had many different interpretations on the empire some say they were positive some say negative. There is evidence to support Cecil's Rhodes view the empire was beneficial for both sides. However there is more persuasive evidence that the empire had negative effects. Furthermore if considering why each gave the interpretations that they did , it is obvious that Cecil's Rhodes interpretation is particularly unreliable .In this essay I will be examine different interpretations on the British Empire to answer the following question "To what extend do you agree with Rhode's view that the
How effective were the suffragists and suffragettes.
How effective were the suffragists and suffragettes The suffragists and suffragettes campaigned for votes for women from 1906 to 1914. The suffragists campaigned politically, organising petitions, marches and meetings. The suffragettes were violent protesters, vandalising public property, private property, and men's affairs. But how effective were these campaigns, of violence and peace. The suffragist's greatest achievement was arguably the introduction of the conciliation bill. Whilst Asquith removed female suffrage from this bill, the prime minister, it was the only bill to pass completely through parliament without being blocked. This bill was undoubtedly influenced by the long campaigns of suffragists. A suffragist would probably not look back on this bill as their greatest achievement because if was eventually blocked and made no difference. A suffragist might look back on the funeral of Emily Davidson, which was attended by suffragists and suffragettes in London and created great publicity for the suffragist cause. This would be because it was not a violent protest, which the suffragettes condemned and was co-ordinated between suffragettes and suffragists and created the most non-violent publicity in the 8 years of campaigning. Suffragettes would also look back on the funeral and death of Emily Davidson as their greatest achievement. Emily Davidson was an important
What were the major problems facing US forces when fighting the war in Vietnam?
What were the major problems facing US forces when fighting the war in Vietnam? There were a number of problems facing US forces when fighting the war in Vietnam. Perhaps one of the biggest problems that they faced was the fact that the Vietcong were fighting using guerrilla tactics: fighting on a small scale, taking independent, irregular actions. The Vietcong depended on stealth, concealment, and surprise attacks and ambushes. Guerrilla warfare spread as Vietminh soldiers who were trained and armed in the North - the Vietcong, returned to their homes in the south to assassinate, ambush and sabotage. Unlike conventional wars in which the Americans may have fought, the war in Vietnam had no defined front lines. Much of the fighting consisted have hit and run attacks, with the guerrillas striking at government outposts and then retreating into the jungles. Most of the US soldiers were also caught out by booby traps set up by the Vietcong. These ranged from simple holes in the ground to metal spikes covered in poison or human excrement. Booby traps were thought to have accounted for 11 per cent of US deaths in Vietnam and 17 per cent of wounds. After 1965, US involvement in the war escalated rapidly in response to the growing strength of the Vietcong. By 1967, US troop strength in South Vietnam had risen to 389,000 men, but despite their sophisticated weapons, the Americans
