Mock exams , history hl

[Parie]

Hi everyone ,

In our school we have now mock exams, and the teacher uses the papers from real examinations of this year. I am asking for a help in listing as many topic on this papers as it is possible. We did already paper 1 upon the Ruhr occupation. So far I noticed that on paper 2 there were such questions :

the peace conferences and crisis of 1929 as the causes of outbreak of IWW

the Stalin's raise to power

and on paper 3:

different opinions over Treaty of Versailles

Hitler's foreign policy

Mussolini's gain to power

Alliance system

I am especially curious about question on French Revolution and Napoleon , as they are my favourite ones, anyone remembers ? Thanks for help

[TykeDragon]

i'm surprised the exam papers are available already, just one month on o.O but those are the exact papers I did! Well, I did those two paper 2 essays, however for paper 3 I did none of those, I did Italian Unification, Bismarck and Alexander II of Russia.

I think those two paper 2 essays are very nice ones indeed, especially as your structure is laid out for you. I can't remember what I wrote brilliantly, but for each essay I had intro, first factor, second factor, third factor, conclusion.

WW2 essay:

- Treaty of Versailles - you can talk about Hitler's rise to power especially here, sorry I can't really remember much but I basically talked about how germany was weakened and angry that it wasn't based on Wilson's 14 points, the weimar republic was left to face hostility because of it (and agreeing to it), it gave hitler his foreign policy aim of overthrowing it which did in fact lead to WW2, i also discussed how it helped mussolini into power in italy due to Italian nationalist outrage at 'limited gains' for Italy, and how Britain/France were allowed large colonies due to mandates whereas italy/germany/japan were bitter they could not. Historians include Fischer, Geary, etc.

- Economic crisis after 1929 - historians include Bullock (German public psychologically weakened by the crisis) and Keynes. It influenced hitler's economic policy and helped him gain support in germany, which is obviously important. It also caused America to retreat back into isolationism and withdraw the loans and stuff, and the German public were worried about being at the mercy of USA economically so looked to Hitler as a leader. I also discussed how Britain/France did not wish to face the cost of rearmament so were keen to appease even more - made them even more forgiving. Sorry, I don't really remember as much.

- Ideological Extremism - lots to talk about here, it was an ideological war! I discussed the alliance between mussolini and hitler, the aggression of mussolini (desired new Holy Roman Empire) and Hitler (Lebensraum, Four Year Plan, Aryan Supremacy, overthrow Treaty of Versailles), Japanese aggressive expansionism in the Far East and links to Hitler/Mussolini, French hostility and fear at being surrounded by fascists, how the fascists disliked the democratic West, and I also mentioned the Spanish Civil War - as this was an ideological war and served as a dress rehearsal for WW2, also showing Stalin that B/F were weak allies. I did counter the factor by saying that Stalin and Hitler made a pact in 1939 despite being ideological enemies, but I did indicate that this wasn't anything more than temporary security. That's all I can remember right now.

Stalin essay:

- errors of his rivals: they underestimated Stalin (calling him the 'mediocrity' of the party) and allowed him to manipulate them (eg in the power struggle they all annihilated each other FOR him!) and especially the fact that they kept Lenin's Testament secret. This Testament merely criticised them as arrogant/hesitant but not much worse... Stalin was called dangerous and evil and it was advised he was removed from his positions - his career would have been over, but they underestimated him and were so arrogant that they kept it all secret. I also mentioned how Stalin tricked Trotsky into missing Lenin's funeral, and also Trotsky's problems with the party (eg slow to convert from Menshevism, criticised the party during the power struggle) etc which all lost them support and popularity, in favour of Stalin, who they overlooked. Historian: Medvedev: 'those in the Politburo were inexperienced to deal with Stalin.'

- propaganda: i had the least to say here, and as far as i am aware this wasn't an issue as there wasn't as much until after he was leader, i think o.O you can mention the newspaper (Pravda? something like that), media exploitation (Stalin strove to ensure that he was always pictured at Lenin's side) and Stalin also set up in 1922-1924 the Lenin Institute, the Lenin Enrolment, and gave speeches on Leninism. This made Stalin seem to be the one who knew all of Lenin's ideas and the Cult of Lenin he created made him appear to be Lenin's truest disciple and definite successor.

- popular support: Stalin had a favourable homelife - for example he was married to the daughter of an old Bolshevik. Also, Stalin was in charge of the Lenin Enrolment which saw party membership increasing massively - this was cleverly done in Lenin's name, however bear in mind that all recruits were loyal to Stalin himself. This came in very handy - notably when managing to get his own policies voted as opposed to his rivals'. An example from 1925: Stalin championed the policy of Socialism in One Country, and as usual Stalin always chose the policies that suited the CURRENT need of the Bolsheviks and that he knew they wanted. This opposed Trotsky's 'world revolution' policy and Stalin had more support as it was a) what the party wanted/needed and b) Stalin's recruits were mainly loyal to him and this allowed him to beat Trotsky. Then, because Zinoviev/Kamenev/Trotsky were united against him, he was able to use Lenin's Ban on Factionalism to have them seen as traitors to the party and had them expelled and exiled.

Hope some of this information helps, I'm very rusty, but these are the more basic gists of what I wrote! How have you got the paper so quick?