Why did the Labour Party win the General Election of 1945?
WHY DID THE LABOUR PARTY WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 1945? INTRODUCTION The general election result of 1945 was one the most important in British political history. The defeat of Winston Churchill and the Conservative Party after victory in Europe was an unanticipated shock to most in 1945. The electorate voted for significant change and a new approach to reconstruction in post-war Britain. The Labour Party won 47.7 per cent of the vote, with 393 seats, against the Conservative vote of 39.7 per cent and 210 seats.1 Following the rejection by the Labour Party of the continuation of the coalition government until the defeat of Japan, Winston Churchill resigned as Prime Minister on 23 May 1945 and from this date the various political parties began their preparation for the coming election. The primary concern of the electorate was effective post-war reconstruction and the result of the election was chiefly determined by public perception of a party's ability to deal with immediate domestic issues. The public were asked what the central question of the election was, 41 per cent answered housing, 15 per cent claimed full employment and 7 per cent said social security.2 This statistic clearly indicates the desire for social reform among the electorate; however, this does not fully explain why the Labour Party won the general election of 1945. The causes of Labour victory are
To what extent did the Tsarist and Soviet governments control and influence music in the period 1875-1975?
Name: Max Norman Candidate Number: 0785 Title: To what extent did Russian governments control and influence music in the period 1875-1975? In particular, how successful were Soviet governments' attempts to control and influence Dmitri Shostakovich? The purpose of this enquiry is to assess the extent to which Russian governments controlled and influenced music in the period 1875-1975. To do this I have primarily taken three composers, each of whom I feel represents a different aspect of the musical community's relationship with governments of this period. However, Dmitri Shostakovich occupies the bulk of discussion. Much of this section is taken up by an examination of his private political views, which superficially seem only slightly relevant to the question at hand. This perception would be mistaken: establishing whether the most prominent composer of the period was or was not a "secret dissident" is crucial for determining how successful the régime's attempts were at controlling music. The picture presented by biographers such as Ian MacDonald of a musician who incessantly hid coded critiques of the system in his works would, if true, imply that the authorities' attempts to restrict cultural freedom were a resounding failure, but that they were unable to realise this. This scenario would have major implications for the question with which this enquiry attempts to
What effect did World War II have on life in Barking and Dagenham?
What effect did World War II have on life in Barking and Dagenham? World War II brought about many sudden changes for the inhabitants of Barking and Dagenham. Like everywhere else in London, they had to endure rationing of not just food but clothes as well, in June of 1941. We can say that a woman's role in society changed the most. They were encouraged to join the Women's Land Army which was set up in June of 1939, at the start of the war. Their role was changing from dutiful mother and wife to much needed aid for the nation. They were seen to be as important as their men in France. They held everything together even though their families were being torn apart. Fathers, brothers and sons had to become soldiers as young as 18, when the government issued conscription notices. Conscriptions were introduced as there were not enough forces, the first conscription being issued in September 1939 conscripting all men aged between 27 and 41, later a conscription for men aged between 18 and 26 was also issued on the governments orders with many young men never returning. Furthermore, mothers had to tolerate their children being taken away from them and evacuated to rural areas as early as September of 1938. Children under the age of 9 had to live with strangers because of the Blitz going on in London which began on September of 1940 and lasted until April of 1945, when the blackout
Asses the relative role of ideology and circumstances in the emergence and development of a resistance movement in France between 1940-1944
Assess the relative role of ideology and circumstance in the emergence and development of a resistance movement in France between 1940 and 1944 The French resistance to the Nazi occupation was not immediate although hostility was already shown by many French people to the Nazi occupation and very few hostility was transformed into action. The French responses to the Nazi occupation and also Vichy regime varied enormously according to James F. McMillan. In the occupied south, resistance was driven by left-wing political stance, while some looking at the 1940 fall of France as a reason to construct a new and better political order as opposed to the old one and others perceived resistance as a natural outcome of the French pre-war attitude.1 It is said that Charles de Gaulle came up with the French term "resistance" and since then became a catch-phrase to describe a nation's struggle against Nazism in post-1945 Western European culture. The practical description of resistance of the French resistance to the Nazi as such, Bob Moore describes as, 'the image of an armed struggle against the enemy; of sabotage actions, assassinations, escape lines and secret agents risking their lives in pursuit of an ultimate Allied victory'.2 This description by Moore completely makes sense as France alongside her allies was in concerted efforts battling Germany since 1939 before the fall of
The Re-Unification Of Germany.
The Re-Unification Of Germany Contents * Introduction * Ostpolitik - Its Origins and Aims * Towards Unity * The Fall of the Wall * Unification * Attitudes and Strategies of the Four Powers -The USA -The USSR -Great Britain -France * Alternatives to Unification * The Legacy of Division Introduction The German Democratic Republic commemorated the fortieth anniversary of its formation on October 7th 1989 amid a mass of military parades and fanfare salutes. Whilst it was intended to be a joyous occasion, it was, for many, a day of great sorrow. Forty years of the GDR represented forty years of living in poverty and fear rather than forty years of successful socialism. The division of Germany, a temporary measure taken by the victorious allies in the aftermath of World War II, appeared to take on a new permanency in the wake of these celebrations. Few East Germans would have believed that in just over a month the Berlin Wall, a symbol of division which had split Europe since 1961, would have collapsed and with it the sprawling Communist empire that was the USSR. Less than a year later the GDR would also cease to exist, its people and territory becoming part of a united Germany few believed they would live to see. The re-unification of Germany came as a shock not just to the people of East Germany but also to the wider global community. From the rumblings of
The Role of Ultra in the Allied Victory in Europein World War II.
The Role of Ultra in the Allied Victory in Europe in World War II Alex Day May 9, 2007 Abstract My essay is on the role of Ultra in the Allied victory in Europe, during World War II. I chose this topic because two years ago I did a project on the mechanics of code breaking. While doing that project I stumbled onto information on Ultra and its usage during World War II. I was very interested in this topic, and although I could not ensue it before, have always wanted to learn more about it. I took this essay as an opportunity for me to go in depth on the issue of Ultra, and try to figure out if it was decisive to the Allies. I have chosen to investigate my research question by comparing the views of the expert historians in this field. Specifically, I will be taking each battle individually, and analyzing Ultra's significance to the battle, by comparing the different points of view. Each battle that I analyze will be split up into three parts. In the first I will introduce the battle, and then explain one view of historians, using specific evidence to back up their claims. In the second part I will explain the alternative view of historians, using again specific evidence to back up their claims. Then finally in the third part I will analyze all of the evidence that was presented beforehand, and through the analysis I will conclude on Ultra's significance to the specific
The Creation of Two Germanies: The Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and the German Democratic Republic (GDR).
The Creation of Two Germanies: The Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) For a number of years Britain, Russia and the United States had discussions among themselves in an attempt to agree on the principles according to which a defeated Germany was to be treated. It had been relatively easy to establish a consensus on certain "negative" aims. Thus there was no question that Germany must be demilitarized and her war industries destroyed. Those primarily responsible for unleashing the Second World War and for perpetrating war crimes were to be brought to justice. All other Germans were to be de-Nazified. The Allies also agreed that Austria, Poland and Czechoslovakia were to be reconstituted as sovereign states. I. Allied Plans and Policies It had been more difficult at the various wartime conferences between Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin to formulate conclusive plans concerning the future of Germany. One of the main bones of contention was whether the Reich should be dismembered or treated as a unit. As no consensus had been reached on this issue, the Allies fell back on the accord of the Yalta Conference of February 1945, which had finalized the division of the country into zones of occupation. The question of a Peace Treaty and the future territorial shape was to be decided at a later date. In the end France was to take charge of the
Conflict in Vietnam pre-1963 - The Development Of Ho Chi Minh's relations with France and America.
History Coursework Conflict in Vietnam pre-1963 The Development Of Ho Chi Minh's relations with France and America 1) Source A shows us that Vietnamese people hated the French, they called them "invaders". Not only did the poor people hate the French, but also the rich and even children "refused to accept the French occupation of 1883", this shows that they were against the French. The Vietnamese used guerilla warfare to defeat the French "by irregular bands of men protected by the people of the countryside, who hid them and fed them. Source B shows us that the men in the front of the picture is Vietnamese, and the man at the back of the picture is French. They look to be wearing different clothes however they look to be very similar, this is because not all the Vietnamese hated the French, some liked the French, which is why they had joined the their army as I can see in the picture. 2) Agreement Both sources C and D agree about why Vietnam was important to them (the French), they both feel that Vietnam is important to the French army. Source C says that Vietnam is theirs "it is our country" they feel that they are in control of the country "which we feel we belong to". Disagreement These sources also disagree, source D says that it wants Vietnam for its raw materials "indo-China was a storehouse of raw materials", these consisted of things like iron, coal and
Account for the varying fates of the Jewish populations in different Balkan countries during World War II.
Account for the varying fates of the Jewish populations in different Balkan countries during World War II. Before the Second World War, more than a million Jews lived in the Balkan states. While more than 500,000 Jews from the Balkans were killed, the fate of the Balkan Jews following the rise of the Nazi's and the outbreak of World War Two varied widely (1). Some populations were almost totally exterminated, while others survived. The Balkan countries that will be examined are Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Greece. To fully understand the Holocaust in these countries, it will be necessary to firstly gather some background information on the Jews in each of the Balkan countries which will allow us to fully understand the degree of anti-Semitism that existed in these countries prior to World War II. It will also be necessary to identify the degree of collaboration between these countries and Nazi Germany. Finally academic theories related to the Holocaust will be analysed in order to explain, if they can why the death rates of Jews in the Balkans vary so much. Romania had the largest Jewish population in the Balkans, by 1930, they numbered over 800,000 (2). However there was little assimilation, in a country where 70 percent of the overall population was rural, 70 percent of Jews lived in cities. Jews were seen as alien and could not be assimilated, and this prejudice was
How far did both Hitler and Stalin have consistent foreign policies?Discuss with reference to the period 1933-1941.
Question:- How far did both Hitler and Stalin have consistent foreign policies? Discuss with reference to the period 1933-1941. In the study of 20th-century history there can be no foreign policy's more influential to the geo-political map than those of Hitler and Stalin. As the autocratic leaders of Germany and Russia, both of which were potential superpowers, the power wielded by them, in their own country and on the world stage, shaped the development of Europe in the last century The period specified in the question has obviously not been selected at random, as January 30th 1933 saw Hitler become Chancellor of Germany, heralding the dawn of the Third Reich and by the end of 1941Germany was at war with Russia and had just declared war on the United States of America. Stalin had seen his former ally invade Russia and had consequently transferred his country's allegiance to reconvene the allies of the First World War. In discussion of the question posed, this essay will first explore the positions of Hitler and Stalin in 1933 and the circumstances that had formed these positions. It will then move onto the aims and ideologies of the two leaders within the timeframe of 1933 to 1939. The years of 1939 to 1941 will be discussed as a period, as the two leaders foreign policies became entwined before violently diverging. According to the Pocket Oxford Dictionary the