The handling of war economy was poorly coordinated and this accounts for the weaknesses in German war production in the years 1939 – 1945. How far do you agree? It is fair to say that the poor coordination contributed a significant amount in the weaknesses that were apparent in German war production between the years 1939 to 1945, but only to an extent. Poor coordination being a strong contributing factor, along with the idea that there was no central power, with different people controlling different areas of the Nazi party, for example, Goebbels heading up the propaganda machine and Himmler running the SS. There are both strengths and weaknesses that support the idea that the weaknesses in German war production was down to poor coordination within the war economy.
The treaty of Versailles greatly humiliated Germany forcing it to accept soul responsibility for the war. Another fault in this treaty was that it did not work as intended. The idea that Germany could ever afford to pay the reparations to full amount was ludicrous as it was already suffering from the defeat of war. These reparations caused runaway inflation throughout Germany. But perhaps the biggest problem of all was that those who created it themselves did not enforce
Modern History Essay Question: Assess the extent that nationalism was a cause of the failure of democracy in Germany in the period of 1918 – 1933 Nationalism was an important and integral factor in the downfall of the Weimar Republic and in turn, the ensuing failure of democracy in Germany in the period of 1918 – 1934. Nationalism is the desire to have your own country. The sense of loyalty and devotion to one’s nation, which the German’s had felt in their militaristic past, was ultimately, devastated by World War 1 and its consequences. In Germany, from 1918 onwards, nationalism was one of the main driving forces for the German people to make Germany a dominant power again by ultimately destroying the Treaty of Versailles. Several attempts from both the left and right sides of government tried to imbue the nationalistic beliefs that were embodied in Germany before they were destroyed by their humiliating defeat in WW1.
Firstly, many say that the Peninsular War was the reason, as it showed France was no longer invincible. However, there are many other reasons such as finance, politics and his own self confidence which accumulated to his downfall. Supporting the statement that the Peninsular War played a prime role in Napoleons downfall is Source 1. It infers ‘The Peninsular War is important in explaining Napoleons eventual defeat for several reasons’. The broad viewpoint of this source suggests that the Peninsular War was definitely the reason for Napoleons downfall.
What actually happened: The Schlieffen Plan was a big gamble by the Germans, and it could have well resulted in defeat for France and Russia, however the plan backfired on the Germans. The first problem that the Germans encountered was that the Belgian Army had put up a resistance, which they had not expected which in turn slowed their advances. The next big problem the Germans had not anticipated was that Britain declared war on Germany because of the pledge to protect Belgium, which they had called a ‘scrap of paper.’ Their gamble had not paid off and soon, when the Russian Army was quicker to respond the Germans had to switch troops to the eastern front however the Russians had still invaded Germany 10 days later. Explain why a Stalemate
The First World War had a major effect of the Russians attitude towards the Tsar but a minor contribution to the decline and fall of the Romanov Dynasty. The Romanov Dynasty was destroyed as a result of various disastrous incidents and major mistakes made by the Tsar Nicholas the || himself. The First World War played a role in his abdication, but to a minor extent as they agitated the citizens to rise against the Tsar. Indeed the first world war had fundamental impacts upon the decline and fall of the Romanov dynasty some of these being the plummeting economy, lack of exports, and inflation. However, a major contribution to the fall of the Romanov Dynasty was the views of the Tsar in regards to the war.
However, with widespread political unrest and a crippling economic crisis, was the constitution simply lucky to have survived her infancy years? It is widely believed that the foundations of the Weimar Republic were perilous to the strength of the new government. When the armistice was signed in 1918, the Germany people were shocked and disgraced as they had been led to believe by propaganda that they were winning the war. Ebert had become a hated and disrespected political figure. Not only did the people of Germany feel betrayed by a man of their own country but consequently, had no faith in the new democratic system.
Nicholas II was the last tsar of the Romanov dynasty, and his own arrogance and incompetence was a key factor in what led him to that title. His decision to maintain an autocratic government, fight in the Russo-Japanese war, and, ultimately, drag Russia into World War I, proved he was not fit to rule, and his actions led to the destruction of his dynasty. In these ways, Nicholas II, while faced with many problems, may have survived had he not ruled the way he did. Nicholas II was an implacable autocrat, and his fear of change alienated the Russian people from their leader. When Nicholas was young, he witnessed his grandfather, Alexander II, being assassinated by terrorists.
This is implying of course that the decision by Nicholas II to go to war against Germany and it’s allies in 1914 was wrong, but this is not the case. Russia actually had many reasons to risk war again; the war was weighed heavily in the allies favour as the combined forces of Great Britain, France and Russia were far stronger than that of Germany, Austria and Hungary. Russia was aware of it’s major failing though, it’s slow modernisation had left it trailing behind that of the other countries, and Russia would have to be prepared for the rapid social and economic change that a war brings. This was Russia’s best chance to modernise and not be left behind. Russia’s early hopes were soon dashed however.
Personally, I strongly believe the treaty of Versailles was completely unfair towards the Germans. The Big Three had forced Germany to sign the treaty and had centred the chaos of the war on one country- Germany. Wilson having published his fourteen points had given the German a misleading thought that if they surrendered they wouldn’t need to put up with the war guilt and reparations. Germany was given a false sense of security by the 14 points because the fourteen points were strongly centred on self-determination which was something that Germany would have liked just to keep their moderately large territory. The reparations that Germany were forced to pay weren’t solely centred on the rulers of Germany because they had had a more profound effect on the citizens of Germany instead.