This allowed the far right to exploit the Germans hate of the treaty of Versailles and connect the treaty to democracy, so the people wouldn’t blame the loss of ww1 on the army but the democratic politician’s. This led to an increase in public support for a more authoritarian dictatorial system the strengthening the far-right. The other main reason the loss
As well as the Depression, the collapse of the Republic can be linked to a large number of factors, including the influence of the army, political instability and constitutional weaknesses. One of the most consequential outcomes of the Depression was the opportunity that it provided Hitler. A majority of the citizens lost faith and belief in the current Social Democratic government, turning instead to the confident and dynamic leader of Hitler. As Evans asserts, ‘citizens began to see in the youthful dynamism of the Nazi Party as a way out of the situation’. What Evans means by this is that the desperation of the people led them to polarising their votes and seeing radical leaders like Hitler as a solution to the mess that Germany had become.
The result of the 1945 election was a shock to not only the people of Britain but also the parliamentary parties, one of the main reasons thought to have led to Labour’s victory, was Churchill’s radio broadcast, in which he stated socialism could not be established without a ‘Gestapo’. Source one, an extract from Margaret Thatcher’s book, explains her thoughts when listening to Churchill’s 1945 radio broadcast. Thatcher believes Churchill said was correct in what he said, but his use of the word ‘Gestapo’ was inappropriate, and wasn’t particularly helpful for post-war Britain. However it could be argued Thatcher knew that what Churchill said was a mistake, but as she was part of the same conservative party as he was, she couldn’t admit it. Although, she does admit even she was shocked when listening to the speech, as she explains “the line was not believable”.
The First World War increased rather than narrowed political divisions within Germany. How far do you agree with this judgement? Although initially it seems that the First World War narrowed the existing political divisions in Germany of the pre-war decade, as the war progressed, the resentment grew, in part because of the huge losses and the economic crisis that hung over the country. Therefore because of this the political divisions increased, to the point that by the end of the war the polarisation of German politics was clear. To begin with, despite the demonstrations against war held on the 28th and 29th of July in Berlin, with crowds of 100,000 strong, once the war had broken out there was a general consensus on the side of national duty and what was considered to be morally right, largely because the government presented it as a defensive campaign against Slav aggression.
Explain why the Nazi Regime proclaimed “Total War” in February 1943. (12 Marks) One factor behind why the Nazi regime went ahead with total war was because it offered a chance to revive public morale following the defeat at Stalingrad. The public morale down at this point however going to war with allies seemed the perfect opportunity in regaining the trust of people in the regime. Josef Goebbels speech proved to be a great example in uplifting the people’s moods in regards to total war. His powerful speech was influential and enabled the German public to feel more optimistic within the war as well as regime.
America has spent numerous amounts of money on strengthening our homeland security as well as border patrol, which have strengthened our defense but weakened our economy. Although some Americans feel much safer within our borders today, there are still many more that still have fear of those terrorists, but with all the new laws stemming from 9/11 people generally feel much safer in America than ever before. In conclusion, 9/11 has had many a huge impact in America in many ways both positive and negative. A positive impact of 9/11 is that Americans came together as one and showed they were there for one another when times got hard. A negative impact that 9/11 has had is the effect it has had on the economy and also with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The elite undermined Weimar as a result of their traditional values and hatred of democracy. In addition, Hitler’s radical new approach to politics utilised the weaknesses in Weimar – he was charismatic and through propaganda convinced the public that he could be their saviour. During the years 1918-28 the Nazis had little impact on the political scene – apart from the failed Beer Hall Putsch, which did earn them admiration from some nationalists. However, during these years, some sections of the public were becoming increasingly disillusioned with Weimar. This was due to events like the devastating 1923 hyperinflation, and of course the Treaty of Versailles, which had tainted Weimar’s reputation from its inception.
Finally, the SA’s activity is also to put fear on the street to get votes for the next elections. Hitler attempted the Munich Putsch because he thought it would benefit them. Firstly, Hitler was very confident about his huge SA army and thought he was powerful. Not only that, but he thought that the army would join him because of the influence of Ludendorff and the SA which are technically ex-Freikoprs. Hitler also thought that since the government was just developing it would have been a good time to seize power and take over the government.
Due to many Germans thinking it was the communists, Hitler would’ve gained even more followers for the Nazi Party and an even bigger amount of power given by Hindenburg. A week after the Reichstag fire, the general election took place. Hitler called for this for the 5 March 1933 hoping it would give him a clear majority in the Reichstag. If he could control parliament then he could create laws to tighten his grip on the nation. However, at the election, Nazis didn't win majority of the votes, therefore a coalition government was formed with the National Party.
This treaty alone could be argued to be what started Americas ever growing involvement to Vietnam, which would mean that president Eisenhower was the most responsible. However it could be argued that president Kennedy’s actions increased America’s involvement in Vietnam that Eisenhower started. When Kennedy came to power he was in a difficult situation because one, Laos was under the control of north Vietnam and had fallen to communism and two, he needed to be seen as ‘going hard’ on communism, this was due to the anti communist sentiment in America. He therefore increased defence spending from $40 billion a year to $56 billion. Another example of how Kennedy increased American involvement would be how the amount of US