This links into the title point that Mussolini had a wide support base and that it was growing. This aslo links to andother factor of his appointment, Mussolinis tactics, he used the dual stratagy, which is the threat of violence but staying within the political system. The nationalists, who wanted a stronger Italy, would have been used as a threat of violence and rebellion. Another factor from the war was the demobalistaion of 5 million troop, this created high unemployment, both were seeking jobs and recognition for their part in the war. The troops would have felt let down as well, so therefore wanted reform and supported Mussolinis violence tactic.
The growth in support for fascism in this period was indeed a key factor in Mussolini’s appointment as prime minister because it helped to put him on the political map. However, the level of this support was simply not large enough to explain Mussolini’s rise on its own. More important was the fear of socialism that gripped much of Italy at this time, along with the need for strong and stable government. Mussolini showed great skill in positioning himself as the answer to these two problems at the same time as convincing the Italian establishment that he would be a responsible prime minister who would respect the constitution and control fascist violence. He may not have had huge popular support, but by 1922 significant numbers of the most influential Italians were prepared to tolerate him as the only acceptable alternative to the status quo.
However, in reality it made it hard for Italy to sell abroad (due to the higher prices), so Italy lost its competitiveness on the world market. In addition, serious deflation took place and by 1936 the government was forced to devalue the Lira. To summarise, the reform was a failure as – although in the short run, Italy seemed powerful, in the long run the economy suffered. The battle for the Lira was a propaganda victory in which Mussolini successfully confirmed the image that the fascists were bringing stability and prosper to Italy, without actually doing so. Mussolini also had two other battles; that for
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.
Source A is about removing opposition and the use of propaganda to control what the population thought and did this is challenging the question as the consent is not given but actually forced out of the none Arian people of Germany. The source suggests that the Nazis removed the peoples basic rights like freedom of speech because they feared that the people would speak out against the laws that had been created to keep them under control. This is a strong argument against the Germans giving support towards the regime because it suggests that the Germans. Source A also suggests that after the war Germany still wasn’t ready politically so Hitler had an easy task in taking power the
Most Americans feared socialism; they linked it to trade unions, mass immigration and anarchy. Socialists believed in equality Big business leaders were afraid of organised labour; the growth of for ‘social justice’ including causes such as women’s suffrage, direct election to the senate and conservation. Some Progressives were pacifists and anti-imperialists but most were strong nationalists. The Progressive wing of the Republican party reunited with the mainstream party in 1916. Progressivism achieved very little as a separate party but at one time, it seemed that it could achieve national support.
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
This gave Hitler tremendous power within the organization as they knew they could not afford to lose him. The Party Gets a New Name In April, 1920, Hitler advocated that the party should change its name to the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP). Hitler had always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest political party in
To avoid war in the years 1935 to 1938, Britain and France turned a blind eye to small acts of aggression and expansion, the United States went along with this policy. Even though Roosevelt knew of the threat the Fascist proposed he was still worried about the majority of the isolationist throughout the country. Testing the waters in 1937 he spoke about the democracies teaming up and trying to “quarantine” the problem. The public did not take to well on this idea, and he quickly dropped the subject. Even though that speech failed Roosevelt somehow managed to argue for neutrality but at the same time convince Congress to start building up the arms and increase the military and naval budget by nearly two-thirds in 1938.
This essay will seek to examine these policies and their varying successes or failures. Economic policies in Fascist Italy can be divided into distinct periods. In Mussolini’s early years, from 1922-1925, the economy was run using traditional liberal ‘laissez-faire guidelines.’ Under the guidance of the then Minister of Finance, Albert de Stefani, taxes were lowered and government expenditure cut. These policies found favour amongst the industrialists, bankers and big landowners who had been instrumental in the Fascist rise to power and thus served the ‘dual purpose of placating the big-business interests and balancing the state’s budget.’ Although the economy enjoyed modest growth, its inherent structural weaknesses were not addressed and in 1925 de Stefani was sacked amidst rising inflation and a falling Lira. The economic policies he had implemented had served their purpose in helping to garner further support for Mussolini and the fascists.