isaiguana Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I am reviewing Topic 3 for history and I have come to ask myself about whether or not Lenin is an acceptable ruler for paper 2. That is, if asked to compare two rulers from two different regions, for example, would I be able to use Lenin as one of them? I am asking this question because I have noticed that he is not a part of the "material for detailed study" in the syllabus, but I have noticed that he has been mentioned in past exams. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
King112 Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Hi, well, I personally don't think so. Really, he wasn't a ruler in the sense that he wasn't like a King. His word was law, more or less, but if you mean, was he like a Kaiser, I don't think so.Maybe I've misunderstood your question, and if that's the case, do let me know.King112 Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
isaiguana Posted April 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Hi, well, I personally don't think so. Really, he wasn't a ruler in the sense that he wasn't like a King. His word was law, more or less, but if you mean, was he like a Kaiser, I don't think so.Maybe I've misunderstood your question, and if that's the case, do let me know.King112I used ruler merely as a term to indicate his control over the USSR. I think you have misunderstood my question, however. I was asking if we would be allowed to discuss him on a paper 2 exam if asked to compare two rulers, for example, as he isn't mentioned in the syllabus but is occasionally mentioned on some past papers. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
King112 Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Hi, well, I personally don't think so. Really, he wasn't a ruler in the sense that he wasn't like a King. His word was law, more or less, but if you mean, was he like a Kaiser, I don't think so.Maybe I've misunderstood your question, and if that's the case, do let me know.King112I used ruler merely as a term to indicate his control over the USSR. I think you have misunderstood my question, however. I was asking if we would be allowed to discuss him on a paper 2 exam if asked to compare two rulers, for example, as he isn't mentioned in the syllabus but is occasionally mentioned on some past papers. Umm, then I guess you could. Something along these lines like "Russian head of party, Vladimir Lenin", I guess it should be OK. Though, if the question states "Using rulers studied" don't use him, because he's not in the syllabus. Otherwise, sure, don't see why not. Though, I really doubt he would help you.Best of luckKing112 1 Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrashmaster Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 I remember seeing this very question on a thread about a year ago. I believe that thread determined that it was iffy. The actual guide, http://www.htav.asn.au/documents/item/2231 , has a list of rulers under topic 3 for detailed study. So, the IBO doesn't consider Lenin to be someone for detailed study according to that list. But, it doesn't say that the topic is technically limited to that list. If you want to play it safe, learn about the rulers in that list as you can be positive the IBO approves of those rulers for Topic 3. Edit: Wow, I found the old thread I mentioned (so you can see what people a year ago had to say about it), and it was seriously a year ago almost to the day. That must have been one of my first posts... http://www.ibsurvival.com/topic/28762-if-you-are-given-a-question-on-a-leader-of-a-single-party-state-can-you-use-lenin/?hl=lenin 1 Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.