HISTORY HL/SL Paper 2

[LottieDay]

10 hours ago, Seung Hun Han said:

I did Hitler's mass support that question. I discussed how the crisis state enabled his radical policies to be accepted by the masses. Also, I argued that after all the crisis happened in Germany, German people started to lean right even though during the golden ages in mid-late 1920s, the society will be stabiliized thanks to Stresemann's economic and political policie which will lead to temporal fall of Nazi.

I did Topic 1, 2 which was about to what extent territorial changes were the most significant consequence of any 20th century war.

I invested almost 50 minutes on my first essay, so I wrote sth like the geopolitical changes after WWI will affect many countries economically and politically given that Germany, who lost many of her industrial lands, will face hard time recovering from inflation which she only temporally did under Stresemann's regime. I said directly, territorial changes Germany led to economic hardships and indirectly led to Germany's aggressive policy because many Germans would build up resentment towards the allies and they would attempt to recover lost lands during 1930s. 

Then, I added the fact that while the territorial changes were the most significant, willingness and effort to stop a war had been made after WWI. I said regardless of how successful League of Nation was, it was built under agreement to prevent war. Such movement started when the world witnessed unprecedented death tolls and effect of mass killing weapons. 

I wrote my outline on the question booklet and my history teacher has it now. I read it yesterday and said the outline seems perfect and if I have written based on what is written in the outline, he expects pretty good grades for history. So, until July, I don't and will not worry about my history grade 

I did this question too and it was to what extent were territorial changes a significant consequence of 20th century WARS...so I wrote about multiple wars (WW1 and the impact on Germany/rise of Hitler/ fuelled WW2) and WW2 (collapse of British empire hence a significant shift in global powers/Germany split into 2/ subsequent cold war)? Then I challenged the question by stating that the economic conditions post-war certainly exacerbated the effects of the territorial changes, so territorial changes weren't necessarily the most significant, as an interplay of factors dictated the impacts of both wars You seem to have only written about WW1? I'm worried that I read the question wrong now, are you sure it said one twentieth century war? Because everybody in my class wrote about multiple wars too...? :))

[Seung Hun Han]

8 minutes ago, LottieDay said:

I did this question too and it was to what extent were territorial changes a significant consequence of 20th century WARS...so I wrote about multiple wars (WW1 and the impact on Germany/rise of Hitler/ fuelled WW2) and WW2 (collapse of British empire hence a significant shift in global powers/Germany split into 2/ subsequent cold war)? Then I challenged the question by stating that the economic conditions post-war certainly exacerbated the effects of the territorial changes, so territorial changes weren't necessarily the most significant, as an interplay of factors dictated the impacts of both wars You seem to have only written about WW1? I'm worried that I read the question wrong now, are you sure it said one twentieth century war? Because everybody in my class wrote about multiple wars too...? :))

I focused on the Hitler question more, so I basically had limited amount of time for the War essay. It didn't say just one war. You are right. Sorry for causing a confusion

[Mebenie Alexandra Ngai]

I found it to be alright and I did question 13 on the reasons for and the extent of support for Hitler up to Jan 1933 as well as question 25 on Origins on the Cold War from 1945 - 1949.  However totally forgot all my historiography for the second question lolz. Hopefully, I'll do better on paper 3. 

[ellie]

17 hours ago, Malino said:

Hey! So how did you evaluate the extent? I did the conditions that allowed him to gain support taking about weimar republic and depression and then the methods he used: violence and his own personal skills. However I said that in 1932 support actually increased because the Nazi party had 230 seats in the Reichstag whilst in 1928 they only had 12.. why do you think that support decreased in 1932?  

 

17 hours ago, LottieDay said:

Hey! I did the Hitler question too and I evaluated it in a similar way, highlighting the reliance on a weak economic situation for Hitler's support as he is largely described as an opportunist (slammed in some historiography there ahaha) who exploited the conditions in which Germany found itself in...I said that his support slightly fell in 1932, as the election on November 1932 saw a 4% swing away from the Nazis as the economy saw a slight improvement in late 1932, although he had already generated sufficient support for this not to hinder his eventual establishment of power

Yup, exactly that for losing support. I think we had different timezones though, because my question was about reasons for and extent of support, not conditions and methods.

[LottieDay]

Just now, ellie said:

 

Yup, exactly that for losing support. I think we had different timezones though, because my question was about reasons for and extent of support, not conditions and methods.

No I think we are the same timezone...I wrote about conditions/methods as they were the reasons for Hitler's support and they dictated the extent of support...ie. Hitler had widespread support because of the conditions that Germany was in affected virtually the entire population + the opportunistic nature of him meant that he could exploit the situation to appear as a solution to Germany's countless problems...which reasons did you use for the support for Hitler?  

[Seung Hun Han]

22 minutes ago, LottieDay said:

No I think we are the same timezone...I wrote about conditions/methods as they were the reasons for Hitler's support and they dictated the extent of support...ie. Hitler had widespread support because of the conditions that Germany was in affected virtually the entire population + the opportunistic nature of him meant that he could exploit the situation to appear as a solution to Germany's countless problems...which reasons did you use for the support for Hitler?  

Same person who wrote for the similar question. I argued that the Germany was at crisis after WWI (economic, political etc) which would drive the Germans to seek for a drastic alternative to solve their problem. However, during the golden ages in mid to late 1920s, Weimar republic managed to restore international conflicts via Locarno pact and resolve the hyperinflation via Dawes plan although the fact that Germany had to loan money from USA will eventually have a massive impact on Germany in the Great Depression. So, a support to Hitler and to many other extremists decreased in this period. I specifically mentioned that how and why crisis state was established in Germany in 1920s and its impact on peoples' tendency. 

For other paragraphs, I wrote that Hitler's 25 point programmes were therefore viewed as an ideal solution to remedy crisis state in Germany, which will enable Hitler to gain support from people from different backgrounds. I think I gave specific example about some of the points that NAZI party made and how it was perceived by the citizens.

Lastly, I wrote that Hiter and Nazi's own quality enabled Hitler to gather popular support. For example, propaganda (Gobbels' brilliant usage of different medias), speech (inspirational method to convince the masses), SA (Showing sort of greatness of NAZI party by having SA march on the street) etc.

[Malino]

32 minutes ago, LottieDay said:

No I think we are the same timezone...I wrote about conditions/methods as they were the reasons for Hitler's support and they dictated the extent of support...ie. Hitler had widespread support because of the conditions that Germany was in affected virtually the entire population + the opportunistic nature of him meant that he could exploit the situation to appear as a solution to Germany's countless problems...which reasons did you use for the support for Hitler?  

Same! I said that the conditions germany was in and the things he did allowed him to get support. Like for example the fact that the Weimar republic people were seen as the "november criminals" and this was exploited by hitler to gain support or when the depression occured meant that people were looking for more extremist parties ecc ecc

[LottieDay]

50 minutes ago, ellie said:

13 minutes ago, Seung Hun Han said:

Same person who wrote for the similar question. I argued that the Germany was at crisis after WWI (economic, political etc) which would drive the Germans to seek for a drastic alternative to solve their problem. However, during the golden ages in mid to late 1920s, Weimar republic managed to restore international conflicts via Locarno pact and resolve the hyperinflation via Dawes plan although the fact that Germany had to loan money from USA will eventually have a massive impact on Germany in the Great Depression. So, a support to Hitler and to many other extremists decreased in this period. I specifically mentioned that how and why crisis state was established in Germany in 1920s and its impact on peoples' tendency. 

For other paragraphs, I wrote that Hitler's 25 point programmes were therefore viewed as an ideal solution to remedy crisis state in Germany, which will enable Hitler to gain support from people from different backgrounds. I think I gave specific example about some of the points that NAZI party made and how it was perceived by the citizens.

Lastly, I wrote that Hiter and Nazi's own quality enabled Hitler to gather popular support. For example, propaganda (Gobbels' brilliant usage of different medias), speech (inspirational method to convince the masses), SA (Showing sort of greatness of NAZI party by having SA march on the street) etc.

Ah cool, always interesting to hear others' points...I considered mentioned Goebbels but he wasn't appointed until Hitler was appointed Chancellor in January 1933 which was after the date stated in the question? Anyway, thank god it's over now, just HL Paper 3 tomorrow...

[TheReelG]

Does anyone even chose quesitons like ''evaluate the role of women in two authoritarian regimes during WWII?'' I can write a paragraph about it, but by no means an entire essay. It's not something I devote my study time to either. 

[oonawong238]

1 hour ago, TheReelG said:

Does anyone even chose quesitons like ''evaluate the role of women in two authoritarian regimes during WWII?'' I can write a paragraph about it, but by no means an entire essay. It's not something I devote my study time to either. 

Those are my best questions lol, like I can't do questions about what political events lead up to the outbreak of World War I, but I can talk forever about the theory of why women didn't advance due to their roles in the war.  

[bwf8398]

I did 1, which was about the role of ideology (TWE) in the outbreak and expansion of WWII. I was not a fan of the question but couldn't answer anything else in the topic. I didn't have a lot to say about ideologies so I related them to the events that spawned the ideologies (hope IB doesn't dislike that too much) and then used appeasement as a counterclaim. I also didn't have much to say about the expansion of war. I did make sure to talk about Japan and Italy as well as Germany, so I think IB will like that. Overall, I'm not really not sure how IB is going to mark the essay, but I'm hoping for at least an 11 or 12.

My other essay was on single party states (I think it was 16?) and was about discussing how two dictators used effective domestic policy to minimize internal opposition. I feel like there was not a ton to say on this topic, but I hit just about every relevant point, for Castro and Mao at least. For counterclaims, I talked about foreign policy and events (Korean War, Bay of Pigs) and their impact. I think it was a pretty solid essay and I don't think I missed much, so I'm hoping it's in the upper end of the 13-16 range, although that might be wishful thinking on my part.

[DNA222]

I have no idea which numbers they were but I discussed Hitler's and Stalin's control (or lack, thereof) of religions during their regimes (authoritarian leaders topic) and economic impact of the Cold War on the US and USSR (Cold War topic). 

[Hisham]

I did topic 4 question 8 on the success 2 dictators had on controlling religion, and topic 5 question 30 about gorbachev's role in ending the cold war.  I chose #30 even though we didn't study him extensively because it was super similar to the Paper 1 we had!!

[ellie]

On 5/11/2016 at 4:09 PM, LottieDay said:

No I think we are the same timezone...I wrote about conditions/methods as they were the reasons for Hitler's support and they dictated the extent of support...ie. Hitler had widespread support because of the conditions that Germany was in affected virtually the entire population + the opportunistic nature of him meant that he could exploit the situation to appear as a solution to Germany's countless problems...which reasons did you use for the support for Hitler?  

Ah, okay! I didn't use opportunism at all; I talked about the lack of any good politicians around after Stresemann died (so nobody to fix the emerging problems anymore, and Hitler benefited from chaos), his exploitation of the people's sadness/anger about Versailles and about people losing faith in democracy and radicalising because of the uselessness of the Reichstag and the Depression. Probably some other things but my brain's scrambled so I can't recall.

[Zangetsu]

For Hitler, I mentioned how when Von Papen became chancellor, he made changes which allowed the Nazi's to have more influence, which also helped extend his support.

[Amaranth]

On 10.5.2016 at 1:27 AM, =-= said:

Did anyone do question 1? The one about ideology contributing to the outbreak and expansion of second world war until the end of 1941? I am really worried right now because I feel like I did not concentrade on the "outbreak of ww2", but rather the role of ideology in the "origin of ww2". I also felt that one of my points wasnt that relevant because I wrote about the role of ideology in Hitler's rise to power as he played the most important role in the start of ww2. Help guys😕😕😕

I did the first and the last question, heh. I think if you wrote good enough about the origins of WWII, you might get half of the points from that question, since that question has two questions in it, the outbreak and origins. I think that question was a good one to apply both general and specific knowledge: the Treaty of Versailles, nationalism/imperialism/facism since WWI, Germany's wish to expand to compete with British Empire and others, war guilt, Wall Street Crash of 1929 etcetc. Just remembering the wording of the question helps to remind the examiner that you just do not hit good-sounding events but, rather, analyze how they affected.  

[=-=]

3 hours ago, Amaranth said:

I did the first and the last question, heh. I think if you wrote good enough about the origins of WWII, you might get half of the points from that question, since that question has two questions in it, the outbreak and origins. I think that question was a good one to apply both general and specific knowledge: the Treaty of Versailles, nationalism/imperialism/facism since WWI, Germany's wish to expand to compete with British Empire and others, war guilt, Wall Street Crash of 1929 etcetc. Just remembering the wording of the question helps to remind the examiner that you just do not hit good-sounding events but, rather, analyze how they affected.  

Thank you:) I dont think I did too well on that question...just hoping the other question and paper 1 would get me marks.

[=-=]

3 hours ago, Amaranth said:

I did the first and the last question, heh. I think if you wrote good enough about the origins of WWII, you might get half of the points from that question, since that question has two questions in it, the outbreak and origins. I think that question was a good one to apply both general and specific knowledge: the Treaty of Versailles, nationalism/imperialism/facism since WWI, Germany's wish to expand to compete with British Empire and others, war guilt, Wall Street Crash of 1929 etcetc. Just remembering the wording of the question helps to remind the examiner that you just do not hit good-sounding events but, rather, analyze how they affected.  

Thank you:) I dont think I did too well on that question...just hoping the other question and paper 1 would get me marks.

[=-=]

3 hours ago, Amaranth said:

I did the first and the last question, heh. I think if you wrote good enough about the origins of WWII, you might get half of the points from that question, since that question has two questions in it, the outbreak and origins. I think that question was a good one to apply both general and specific knowledge: the Treaty of Versailles, nationalism/imperialism/facism since WWI, Germany's wish to expand to compete with British Empire and others, war guilt, Wall Street Crash of 1929 etcetc. Just remembering the wording of the question helps to remind the examiner that you just do not hit good-sounding events but, rather, analyze how they affected.  

Thank you:) I dont think I did too well on that question...just hoping the other question and paper 1 would get me marks.

[=-=]

3 hours ago, Amaranth said:

I did the first and the last question, heh. I think if you wrote good enough about the origins of WWII, you might get half of the points from that question, since that question has two questions in it, the outbreak and origins. I think that question was a good one to apply both general and specific knowledge: the Treaty of Versailles, nationalism/imperialism/facism since WWI, Germany's wish to expand to compete with British Empire and others, war guilt, Wall Street Crash of 1929 etcetc. Just remembering the wording of the question helps to remind the examiner that you just do not hit good-sounding events but, rather, analyze how they affected.  

Thank you:) I dont think I did too well on that question...just hoping the other question and paper 1 would get me marks.