Kaiser Wilhem II was an unpredictable, intelligent man with a poor judgement, hardly the kind of person you would give almost unchallenged political powers. The Kaiser's constitutional powers showed that he certainly had enough potential powers to be a authoritarian leader and i believe he fulfilled all his potential by using his power to 'ensure the constitution preserves the power of the elite' which was Bismarks main aim as the chancellor. The Kaiser could appoint and dismiss the Chancellor, dissolve the Reichstag with the consent of the Bundesrat, control Germany's foreign policy and serves as the commander of chief of the armed forces. The plethora of consitutional powers the Kaiser held clearly supports the
Also, the weakness and exploitation of the Weimar Constitution played a similarly important role as proportional representation and article 48 both created a path for the Nazi Party to gain influence in the Reichstag. Overall, however, the rise of the Nazi Party must be considered as the main reason for the failure of the Weimar Republic, as the Nazi’s electoral success eventually led to the political intrigues which oversaw Hitler’s appointment as chancellor in 1933 which ultimately led to their success in the March 1933 election and the passing of the enabling act in 1933, which ultimately confirmed that the Weimar Republic had failed. During the period of 1924 – 27 the Nazi party was banned as result of the Beer Hall Putsch. The dramatic increase in votes from 0.8 million in 1928, to 17.3 million in 1933, highlights just how rapid the rise of the Nazi Party was after their emergence from the ‘quiet years’ in 1927. It can be argued that this was down to the popularity of Adolf Hitler and thus led to the failure of the Weimar Republic, as his popularity paved the way for his invitation into the chancellorship, from which he was able to manipulate his way to the presidency.
Why did Stalin emerge as leader of Soviet Russia? Observing Stalin’s background and other personal factors, Stalin was indeed a weak contender for the leader of Soviet Russia and lacked a strong, powerful past that people such as Trotsky had. However from 1924 to 1929, Stalin with the use of manipulation, determination and tactical strategies managed to emerge as leader of Soviet Russia. The reason as to why he created such an outcome is quite clearly impressive, but what really worked for him? An important factor as to why Stalin was able to emerge as leader was due to the advantages that he had as a result of his position within the communist party.
When Keynes rejected the scale of reparations placed on Germany and resigned from his post at the Treasury, he lead the way for what many leading politicians were to understand later on. Keynes supported the approach of Lloyd George that for economic and political reasons, Europe needed a successful Germany, which would be seriously difficult to achieve whilst the excessive reparations were placed on them. Furthermore, his book The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919), was successful in influencing the view of Britain that a weak Germany would only make the recovery of Europe after the war, a lot more difficult. On the other hand, from taking this view, politicians were criticised for being 'too lenient' towards Germany. Even Lloyd George, who took a much tougher political approach towards the reparations, received criticism.
3) Account for the successes and failures of democracy in Germany in the period 1918/1933 The Weimer Republic was doomed to failure from the outset. The quote from historian and journalist Sefton Delmar “Germany democracy was born with a hole in its heart”, has immense accuracy when post-war Germany is evaluated. The creation of a completely new and foreign form of government aggravated Germany’s post war position. Struggling with political, economic and social strife by the end of WWI, did not allow for a powerful government to be formed. The crucial weakness of the Weimer republic lay not in the strength of its enemies but in the striking absence of its friends.
He did not let anything stand in his way; unfortunately, the S.A was in the way. Hitler had many goals for Germany, and was able to succeed but he was only able to do that because he got rid of the S.A. Once he gained absolute power World War 2
Source B backs up this evidence when it says “might for months on end and even years, have no opportunity of speaking to Hitler…” this strengthens the fact that Hitler was a hard man to reach. In total, the two sources agree that Hitler was not seen by many and that if he ever was then it would be only for a special or important reason.
To what extent did the Nazis remain in power due to support from popular policies? The Nazis ruled germany from 1933 to 1939 and were relatively unchallenged. This is a source of debate given that when they came to power although they were the most popular party they had never won the majority of public support in elections and Hitler had twice been beaten by Hindeburg in the Presidential election. Furthermore once in power the Nazi power was limited as Hitler only had 2 other nazis' in the government. The reason behind their remaining in power has been put down to genuine support gained from popular policies introduced by Hitler.
How far do the sources suggest that James Callaghan was a good prime minister? As sources 1 and 2 would suggest James Callaghan was indeed a good prime minister. James Callaghan is a great prime minister who had the qualities that made him capable of running Britain but daunting economic circumstances led to his downfall. By the end of his government, Britain was deemed “The sick man of Europe”. Source 3 shows a clear disagreement though, as it states Callaghan “struggled to rule effectively until a vote of no-confidence” was called upon.
Hitler’s authority was derived from his personal qualities as opposed to being vested in the office which he held. “All authority within the Party was ultimately concentrated in the hands of the leader, Hitler.” The party was organised around the idea of the Fuhrerprinzip. This laid down that power was concentrated in the hands of one leader and that his authority was absolute. This gives the impression of a very ordered power structure, but in reality it was more complex. Even before 1933, the Nazi Party leadership, Hitler aside, was undermined by its inability to exert control over the regional Gauleiters, who saw themselves as Hitler’s personal representatives responsible only to him.