HSC Modern History Question Thread

[sudodds]

What else should I put for that section? Like besides the treaty of Brest-Litovsk?

Take your pick from the events in the syllabus - social and political reforms, Treaty, Civil War, NEP All can be argued in some capacity, as they were all vital to securing the bolshevik consolidation of power, and the promotion of Bolshevik ideology.

EDIT: actually maybe not social political reforms and NEP --> like they can defs be argued, but they aren't explictly on the Trotsky syllabus.

[Rasika]

Yeaaah see I wanna talk about them but I only have like around 2min so I'm not sure...haha

[sudodds]

Yeaaah see I wanna talk about them but I only have like around 2min so I'm not sure...haha

Civil War is probably your best bet. Cut out some of your discussion upon pre-revolutionary Russia (and maybe even some of your discussion on the 1905 revolution and when he actually wrote his theories - not completely, like you need to provide some context, but the impact is more important).

[Rasika]

Hmm okay I can do that then-- thank you for your help!!

Civil War is probably your best bet. Cut out some of your discussion upon pre-revolutionary Russia (and maybe even some of your discussion on the 1905 revolution and when he actually wrote his theories - not completely, like you need to provide some context, but the impact is more important).

I have done all that ^^ but can you clarify how trotsky's theory impacted the civil war?

Mod Edit [Aaron]: Merged double post. Unnecessary.

[sudodds]

I have done all that ^^ but can you clarify how trotsky's theory impacted the civil war?

It's impact is a nuanced issue - though the Civil War was an example of Trotsky forgoing some of his hardline ideological adherence to solve the immediate conflict (eg. reinstating rank and class to the Red Army), it was, in the long term, an attempt to secure more firmly the Bolshevik's dominant position within Russia through the elimination of their enemies, and thus an attempt to secure Bolshevik ideology - Permanent Revolution - as the dominant ideology of Russia (whether this really worked it definitely up for debate - this was the goal however). A Permanent Revolution could not occur until Russia was stable, which relied upon the success of the Civil War. Along with this, you could definitely argue that much of the way in which Trotsky attempted to motivate the army was through his ideological rhetoric (eg. giving agency to the proletariat), which was filtered through his belief in Permanent Revolution.

[Rasika]

It's impact is a nuanced issue - though the Civil War was an example of Trotsky forgoing some of his hardline ideological adherence to solve the immediate conflict (eg. reinstating rank and class to the Red Army), it was, in the long term, an attempt to secure more firmly the Bolshevik's dominant position within Russia through the elimination of their enemies, and thus an attempt to secure Bolshevik ideology - Permanent Revolution - as the dominant ideology of Russia (whether this really worked it definitely up for debate - this was the goal however). A Permanent Revolution could not occur until Russia was stable, which relied upon the success of the Civil War. Along with this, you could definitely argue that much of the way in which Trotsky attempted to motivate the army was through his ideological rhetoric (eg. giving agency to the proletariat), which was filtered through his belief in Permanent Revolution.

Is there a way to like talk about the civil war in around 1-2 sentences because i feel like theres not enough information on it-- because i was thinking of putting the civil war and how he used his theory to help successfully win the war and then i want to go into the signing of brest-litovks.... if that makes sense

[sudodds]

Is there a way to like talk about the civil war in around 1-2 sentences because i feel like theres not enough information on it-- because i was thinking of putting the civil war and how he used his theory to help successfully win the war and then i want to go into the signing of brest-litovks.... if that makes sense

If you only want to focus on the positives maybe just focus on how he used his ideological rhetoric as motivation/propaganda for the Red Army - do some research into how many people were conscripted to the Red Army during the Civil War (hint: it was a very significant amount!)

[Rasika]

"During the civil war, he employed this theory to serve as a motivational tool to boost the morale of the 800,000 soldiers in the Red Army, since the existence of his theory was dependant on Russia’s stability through the success of the civil war.
However, he knew and understood that theory was not always possible...(this just goes on to the treaty part...)
 

[sudodds]

"During the civil war, he employed this theory to serve as a motivational tool to boost the morale of the 800,000 soldiers in the Red Army, since the existence of his theory was dependant on Russia’s stability through the success of the civil war.
However, he knew and understood that theory was not always possible...(this just goes on to the treaty part...)
 

Good! However I still think you need to draw out the significance of Permanent Revolution more - why was it so motivational? Remember that the official title of the Red Army was the "Workers' and Peasants' Red Army". What aspects of Permanent Revolution do you think they may have found appealing? Integrating a bit of your knowledge on the theoretical aspects of Permanent Revolution will really boost up the sophistication of your response - even if its just one extra sentence. (I also think that it might be a good idea to mention that Trotsky also used ruthless and harsh discipline to keep the army in check, just so it doesn't look like you've ignored the negative stuff, but if you don't have enough time/words then just leave it at that). Also rather than saying 'possible' for the treaty, I think a better word would be 'practicable'

[Rasika]

Hmm okay! Well , tbh, i dont think i need to add the negatives because i already do with the response before it so il just add the motivation part so then it doesnt seem like im repeating

Good! However I still think you need to draw out the significance of Permanent Revolution more - why was it so motivational? Remember that the official title of the Red Army was the "Workers' and Peasants' Red Army". What aspects of Permanent Revolution do you think they may have found appealing? Integrating a bit of your knowledge on the theoretical aspects of Permanent Revolution will really boost up the sophistication of your response - even if its just one extra sentence. (I also think that it might be a good idea to mention that Trotsky also used ruthless and harsh discipline to keep the army in check, just so it doesn't look like you've ignored the negative stuff, but if you don't have enough time/words then just leave it at that). Also rather than saying 'possible' for the treaty, I think a better word would be 'practicable'

Should i say that 'This proved to be succesfull because his theory appealed to the Red Army who were comprised of workers and peasants. Their appeasment of the theory was due to its notion that it is only through an uprising with the proletarians and peasant class, that capitalism can be overthrown
 
idk if it makes sense...

Mod Edit: Merged

[sudodds]

Should i say that 'This proved to be succesfull because his theory appealed to the Red Army who were comprised of workers and peasants. Their appeasment of the theory was due to its notion that it is only through an uprising with the proletarians and peasant class, that capitalism can be overthrown
 
idk if it makes sense...

Essentially - you've got the right idea, but your sentence structure is holding you back. Something like this would be better: "the theory of Permanent Revolution was used by Trotsky to motivate the Red Army, principally comprised of workers and peasants, as it stressed their collective agency and power over the bourgeoise, members of whom (such as the Tsarists and foreign armies) supported the White Army."

[Rasika]

What would be a good concluding sentence to wrap this section? Because i want to say like 'Furthermore, it is evident that Trotsky’s overall theory of Permanent Revolution significantly impacted on the national history of Russia because....' something to link it back to the question of how it impacted national history?

[sudodds]

What would be a good concluding sentence to wrap this section? Because i want to say like 'Furthermore, it is evident that Trotsky’s overall theory of Permanent Revolution significantly impacted on the national history of Russia because....' something to link it back to the question of how it impacted national history?

Don't use "furthermore" - that suggests you are going to start discussion another point - use 'thus' or 'therefore' instead. Yes, you defs want to be linking back to your question, but also your thesis! You don't need to add anymore information, just sum up your argument (it'll probably look very similar to your first sentence).

[diesxel]

Hello! I have a question about Conflict in Europe. Can someone please explain the idea of collective security?? I get it but not really..especially in the context of the work..thanks!!

[Rasika]

Don't use "furthermore" - that suggests you are going to start discussion another point - use 'thus' or 'therefore' instead. Yes, you defs want to be linking back to your question, but also your thesis! You don't need to add anymore information, just sum up your argument (it'll probably look very similar to your first sentence).

I kinda reworked my thesis:
"Trotsky’s theory of Permanent Revolution was one of his most significant contributions to
the national history because it was used to consolidate power over the Soviet Union."

Because my teacher said to clearly identify the impact in your first sentence so i was trying to say ^ that the theory was used to help them take over the soviet union and gain power...