History EE- Red Scare and McCarthyism

[Nenab]

Hi! I am just beginning my research on my Extended Essay, but need help coming up with my question. I am interested in writing about mccarthyism and the second red scare but am having trouble narrowing down my question. I was thinking about the following:

To what extent did McCarthyism alter the political climate of the United States

How did the fear of communism lead the methods of McCarthyism into an area of lawlessness? OR How was the lawlessness of McCarthyism influenced by the fear of communism in the public?

How did fear of communism in the Second Red Scare lead to injustices during McCarthyism?

 

I'm having trouble combining these to form good question. Any guidance will help.

Thank You

Edited January 29, 2018 by Nenab

[Nomenclature]

I think the first question is the best in that it asks a question that you can't immediately answer.

For all the other ones, I don't know if you can arrive at a conclusion that doesn't seem obvious. I mean, clearly, fears influenced the success of McCarthy's purges as without them he wouldn't have been able to blacklist anybody.

I'd be interested though to know what you think. Thanks.

[Lixter]

Question 1 seem to be the best question but I have a different reason as compared to Nomenclature. I personally feel that this question will allows you to have a larger research scope as compared to the rest of the questions like questions 2 and 3. Both of these questions are merely questions that evaluate the impact and consequences of a single factor (fear). However, the way that you've phrased question 1 allows for a greater room of discussion about the topic at hand (McCarthyism) as you are compelled to discuss the various ways McCarthyism influenced the political climate of the US rather than just one sole factor. 

I also suggest that you could add in a time frame to be a little bit more specific with the question. 

Other than that, I find it to be a very interesting question that may score really high if done properly. Good luck with your EE! 

Hope this helps!

[Nenab]

Thank you for answering! At first I was more leaned towards the second question, but now I agree with both of you on how it seems obvious. So, I think I will go with the first one as it does allow for a greater room of discussion. How is this for the final question: (does it need to be a question) 

Analyze the extent to which McCarthyism altered the political climate of the United States during the Second Red Scare in the 1950s.

And one more question, for an 'extent' question, is it necessary to acknowledge the counterargument or other side?

 

Thanks again!

 

 

[Lixter]

33 minutes ago, Nenab said:

...how is this for the final question: (does it need to be a question) 

It would be preferable for your topic to come in the form of a question. You can rephrase your question to "To what extent does McCarthyism altered the political climate of the United States during the Second Red Scare in the 1950s?"

33 minutes ago, Nenab said:

And one more question, for an 'extent' question, is it necessary to acknowledge the counterargument or other side?

Most definitely! A "To what extent" question tests your ability to think from different perspectives while arguing for each respective viewpoint. It would not only show off your critical thinking abilities to the marker, it would also allow your EE to be more balanced and objective since you are not stating a one-sided argument.

Hope this helps!  

Edited January 29, 2018 by Lixter

[Nomenclature]

3 hours ago, Nenab said:

Thank you for answering! At first I was more leaned towards the second question, but now I agree with both of you on how it seems obvious. So, I think I will go with the first one as it does allow for a greater room of discussion. How is this for the final question: (does it need to be a question) 

Analyze the extent to which McCarthyism altered the political climate of the United States during the Second Red Scare in the 1950s.

And one more question, for an 'extent' question, is it necessary to acknowledge the counterargument or other side?

 

Thanks again!

 

 

Acknowledging the counter-argument is always good. Finding a historian(s) who you disagree with and argue against is good. Re: "To what extent" there was a runor that this sort of fell out of favor, but it doesn't really matter. The point is that you have to conclude what the specific effects were if you say it had a large effect. If you conclude it had a small effect, you'll also have to go into detail. The point is you shouldn't just say so and so had a large effect or small effect, be explicit with what those effects pr non-effects were. Also, a question is the traditional way to write as the penultimate part of your intro followed by your thesis responding to the question to finish the intro.

[Nenab]

6 hours ago, Lixter said:

It would be preferable for your topic to come in the form of a question. You can rephrase your question to "To what extent does McCarthyism altered the political climate of the United States during the Second Red Scare in the 1950s?"

Most definitely! A "To what extent" question tests your ability to think from different perspectives while arguing for each respective viewpoint. It would not only show off your critical thinking abilities to the marker, it would also allow your EE to be more balanced and objective since you are not stating a one-sided argument.

Hope this helps!  

Okay! I am now going with that question, and I like your point about the counterargument. 

Thanks for helping!

[Nenab]

4 hours ago, Nomenclature said:

Acknowledging the counter-argument is always good. Finding a historian(s) who you disagree with and argue against is good. Re: "To what extent" there was a runor that this sort of fell out of favor, but it doesn't really matter. The point is that you have to conclude what the specific effects were if you say it had a large effect. If you conclude it had a small effect, you'll also have to go into detail. The point is you shouldn't just say so and so had a large effect or small effect, be explicit with what those effects pr non-effects were. Also, a question is the traditional way to write as the penultimate part of your intro followed by your thesis responding to the question to finish the intro.

Thanks for the advice on the counterargument. Using a historian is a good way to counter argue the point. Thanks again for all your advice!