In turn this would destroy Britain commercially and their industrial economy allowing Napoleon to take over Britain however did not work and left Napoleon worse off then he was before. His next mistake was the Peninsular war and as a result weakened his empire even more by the Spanish guerrillas, Germans, and Italians turning against him. Lastly his third mistake lost him most of his soldiers and the tactic used to defeat him was the scorched-earth policy, by the Russians. These mistakes greatly weakened Napoleons Empire. The empire was then declared war on by Britain, Russia, Prussia, Sweden, and Austria.
Was King John really a bad king? Most people think that King John was a bad King for example he taxed people heavily, he lost wars, also he stole from people. People only believe this because in those times the monks where the only ones who could write but they were all biased to the Pope. John did do good things for people such as he fed paupers increased the size of the navy. In this paragraph I aim to prove that king John was a bad king.
“Assess the view that the collapse of the Weimar Republic was primarily due to the appeal of Hitler and his Nazi party” The Weimar Republic government was riddled with weakness and incompetence in a variety of crucial social, economic and political areas. This caused the influence of the Nazi Party, which through its charismatic and nationalistic leader, Adolf Hitler, it gained a large amount of support. However it was due to the Weimar Republic’s own failings that the Nazi Party became appealing and as a result the Weimar Republic was brought to its inevitable demise in 1933 with Hitler ready to take the reigns. When the Treaty of the Versailles was signed in 1919, the government was making a very unpopular decision amongst the citizens, as it a result lead to the downfall of the Weimar Republic. The Treaty caused humiliation and shock amongst the citizens of the country, much of the political backlash was due to the fact that the Allies were dictating to Germany the harsh terms of the war reparations, which was seen as absurd by many citizens as they did not feel as if they were responsible for starting the war nor did they feel as though they had lost.
Rachel Kay How accurate is it to say Frederick William IV was responsible for the failure of the Frankfurt Parliament? The Frankfurt Parliament was established to create freedom of press, German citizenship for all, fair taxation, equality of political rights and to create a unified Germany. However, countries like Austria greatly opposed it. Frederick William IV could be seen as responsible for the failure of the Frankfurt Parliament because he refused to accept any form of leadership and made it clear he distrusted the ‘gentlemen of Frankfurt’. However, many other factors played a role in the demise of the Parliament such as the fact that they were ill-organised, the lack of popular support and their inability to enforce decisions.
There were a number of factors throughout the period 1919-1934 which were responsible for the downfall of the Weimar Republic. The Weimar Republic's inability to deal with the increasingly dominant economic and social issues in Germany caused discontent throughout the country and consequently caused the German citizens to doubt the Republic. The actions of Hitler and the Nazi party were also a significant contributing factor to the destruction of the Weimar Republic, as as they gained support through their use of legality, propaganda and violence support for the Weimar Republic decreased. However the Weimar Republic's inability to deal with the problems of Germany was a more significant factor than the rise of the Nazis, as their failures were the main reason behind why the Nazis were able to gain power, demonstrating the Weimar Republic was mainly responsible for its own destruction. The failure of the Weimar Republic to fix the increasingly pressing problems of Germany consequently contributed massively to their downfall, as it demonstrated their weakness.
Germany was not a parliamentary democracy in any shape or form. The Herero Revolt took place from 1904-1907 and resulted in the subjection of a deliberate policy of genocide including execution and incarceration in concentration camps, dramatically reducing the number of Herero people by 80%. The chosen punishment for the revolt was slated massively by many people, including Matthias Erzberger, highlighting the lack of financial control in parliament and pointing out that the punishment for the Herero rebellions had cost the state 456 million marks, a substantial amount of money. This incident produced a political crisis, and the political parties in the Reichstag were no longer content as they had previously been. This refusal to agree with each other and frequent 'slating' of the decisions was not the appropriate conditions for a democracy, as many people would be unhappy for a majority of proposed arrangements.
They included Jews, anti-Nazi Germans, and the Slavic people. As in 1933, the documents show how the US State Department continued with its restrictive policy on foreigners. This is because the stock market had crashed, there was rising unemployment and everybody felt that the country lacked resources to continue accommodating new immigrants (Abzug 145). Despite this, natives of some American states reflected the growing attitude of anti-Semitism at that time. According to him, as recorded in the New York Times, American anti-Semitism although it had not reached the level of the Nazi Germany, pollsters estimated that they were being unfavorable to them (Abzug 25).
(Hoffmann). Even though the novel became successful at first, the novel was practically outlawed in Germany. “The ten years distance from World War I allowed for objective assessment, but attitudes to the lost war had polarized: those who saw it as a bloody warning accepted Remarque's book; those who attributed Germany's defeat to a stab in the back, or viewed the war as a test by fire of German nationhood rejected it” (Murdoch). The Nazis were so appalled by Remarque's books; they were burned in 1933 for “betraying the German soldiers”. These
The only reason the military was too large and unsupported was because many of the taxpayers died of the plague. The German barbarians, which were the ones that eventually burned Rome to the ground, didn’t support brothels, public baths, and drank ale made with boiled water. They also lived in more spread out housing This would have made them far less susceptible to plague. When they invaded Rome, they would have been far stronger, whereas the Romans would be weak and small, ripe for the picking. Even though the Gothic tribes were mistreated, doesn’t meant they would have rebelled enough to cause the Fall of Rome.
Another thing was there was the weakness of the Weimar government, which played its part. The Weimar government was failing miserably, what with a failed economy, no power, a great depression, unemployment, a weak president, and the rise of terrorism and extremism. The Social Democrats were losing their touch. During the Stresemann years of the 1920s the Nazis couldn’t even get into double figures when it came to seats in the Reichstag. Germany, it looked, was on the rise while Stresemann was Chancellor but the Nazis and their appealing polices were al too good for the people of Germany to refuse and so while the votes for the Social Democrats only increased ever so slightly the Nazi votes were plumiting and with every election they grew and grew.