Luck played a big part into how Stalin defeated the left side of the party. Because of Trotsky’s illness he often missed political conventions meaning the he couldn’t get his view across to the general public. This meant that Stalin was a lot more popular than Trotsky. Also the fact that Lenin’s testament wasn’t published played a part in Stalin’s success. In his testament he heavily criticized Stalin; if it was published then it would have damaged Stalin’s popularity.
Despite the publicity gained from this particular newspaper being quite derrogative towards the suffragettes, publicity was gained. It could be said that this made people realise that the Suffragettes were prepared to go to great lengths for suffrage. However, in reality if this particular paper was the only paper that a person read, all they would gain from reading this article is the fact that the Suffragettes are immature, reckless and quite frankly idiotic people who most definitely could not be trusted with the vote. We have to take into consideration that this source is not typical, being a conservative paper, addmitting that the action was a leap forward for the Suffraggettes would be kicking themselves in the teeth. Source 11 is an extract from Christabel Pankhurst's autobiography (Emeline's sister.)
The election for the coalition results in 76% supporting pro-Weimar parties, showing that the opposition and threats to the government had settled. People in Germany were no longer looking for extremist parties which was proved by the failure of the right-wing coalition. In theory the coalitions should have worked well with the cooperation from all parties. However, the SPD were reluctant to work with other parties subsequently weakening the democracy. This proves the political instability of Germany in this period as they were the largest party in the Reichstag but still refused to cooperate.
“The failure of political extremism in Britain, in the 1930’s was due to the strength of the National Government” Assess the validity of this statement. During the 1930’s political extremist parties failed to gain power in Britain, despite having success in Europe. It can be argued that this was because the National Government had many strengths and was able to effectively run the country to a stable state, thus the political extremist could not break into main stream politics within Britain. Between 1931 and 1940 the National Government held office, consisting of the main political parties at the time, and having popular leading figures such as MacDonald (1931-1935), Baldwin (1935-1937) and Chamberlain (1937-1940), helped the Government to have wide spread popularity and support throughout the country. This patronage was important because of the threat from political extremists; the government needed a strong army of support that could withstand the persuasions of the extreme left and right winged groups, the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) and the British Union of Fascists (BUF).
Another Major flaw was that “the country, whose president, Woodrow Wilson, had dreamt up the idea of the League - America -, refused to join it.” The league’s most powerful militaries Britain and France not only suffered casualties, but also economically as they were greatly in debt to the United States. Because of this neither country was enthusiastic to get involved in disputes that did not affect Western Europe. Therefore the League had no military might and could only enforce economic sanctions in hope that they worked against aggressive nations. All these flaws point to signs that the League of Nations was a failure. However, even though there were a few setbacks, the league was a success in many ways.
The failed Putsch gave the Nazis the appearance of being violent revolutionaries and law-breakers. They appeared to promote street violence - not popular with most people, who supported law and order. Another affect of the Putsch was that Hitler was no longer able to give public speeches - this was part of his sentence. Hitler's speeches had been one of the main attractions of the Nazi party - he was seen by many to be a very powerful orator - so without his speeches the party lost a lot of power. Another problem was that Hitler's image and ideas were unpopular in this period, decreasing the appeal of the Nazi party.
They realised that in order to gain voters support, they would have to leave the core socialistic values of 'old' Labour behind. This is because left-wing ideals at this time were hugely unpopular with the electorate. To achieve this electability, New Labour was less dogmatic than the old, socialist core of the Party. Many policies were toned down, especially economic ones. This general shift to the centre ground gained voters back, who had previously been Labour, but had voted Conservative recently.
Chartism is a fairly dispersed movement, its large nature and appeal coupled with many different opposing viewpoints, make it really difficult to categorize, and equally difficult to find a defined origin. Chartism in its rawest definition was the world first working class movement, which by its definition would give it a huge backing politically. But why exactly did it come about in the around 1838? One of the main reasons would have to be the failure of the so-called “Great” reform act for most people. Effectively the act benefited the middle classes, who were now given an electoral voice in parliament, while the working classes were largely ignored, causing widespread anger and resentment for the act, and all those it benefited.
This leads on to another cause that led to the Chartism movement, the disappointment of the 1832 Reform Act. Leading up to the act, working classes had given massive support to the middle class led campaign for the act, with the hope of legislation to help them. Although it was passed by the Whigs, the working class were dissatisfied because it did not enfranchise them and they were still left without the vote. Whigs regarded the act as the final change in the electoral system, but Chartists labelled it just the beginning. Although we’ve only listed two causes in detail there were many more that led to the Chartist
The reason why socialism, in fact, didn’t work was because it disregards encouragement. People tend to act with encouragement, whether in a positive or negative way. The ending effects leading to the downfall of socialism made the citizens poor. Though there was some individual freedom, the government still controlled everything. The government also took over the press and the media with its heavily influenced use of propaganda.