HSC Modern History Question Thread

[lucyjayne]

Hey,
I would personally structure my response as follows
1. TOV - Discuss its provisions (army, terriotorial etc.) and how this meant that the Weimar Republic was immediately stained by its association with the humiliation of the TOV. In addition, the army provisions in the TOV directly led to the Kapp Putsch - an example of this disdain and the responses to it. I would also refer to how the TOV and its economic reparations led to the hyperinflation and occupation of the Ruhr, further examples of humiliation for the German people and hence further distaste for the Republic.
2. 1919 Constitution (Article 48 and Proportional Representation) - Proportional Representation allowed minorities to gain seats in Reichstag, led to instability, reduced the legitimacy of the Republic, didn't allow for majorities. Article 48 = emergency decree - misused by Hinderburg (who was against the Republic) and eventually manipulated by conservative elites to overthrow democracy using it.
3. Weimar' inability to deal with conservative elites - army would eventually support Bruning who convinces Hindenburg to bring Hitler in as Chancellor.
4. Great Depression - reminder of all that is wrong with WR. Sways people back to extreme parties (grow from 27 to 58% in votes) and the WR response to the Depression (cut unemployment funding by 12%) only further sways people.

You could discuss Stresseman but im not entirely sure as the question doesn't specify what the impact refers to so a bit hard to comment right now on that

THANK YOU SO SO SO MUCH!!!

[sudodds]

Haha okay! I can't find my essay plan on consolidation of power by nazis 1933-34  http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/hitlerconsolidaterev1.shtml
Do you think this site looks good enough? I know you didn't do Germany but those give all the main points of how it happened, just doesn't have any quotes or stats I think like my plan did, and would you recommend I categorise each into themes or just write out chronologically how they maintained power
Just looked I think almost all border on being political ahah

I used bbc bitesize a lot last year Definitely a good resource for overviews and summaries. Personally I'd draw out the factors/themes, rather than write it out chronologically, just because the latter can sometimes look a bit "meh" - plus it is way easier to slip into narrative/retell with a chronological essay. However, as you said, I didn't study Germany aha, so I can't make the call for sure with this essay.

[dancing phalanges]

I used bbc bitesize a lot last year Definitely a good resource for overviews and summaries. Personally I'd draw out the factors/themes, rather than write it out chronologically, just because the latter can sometimes look a bit "meh" - plus it is way easier to slip into narrative/retell with a chronological essay. However, as you said, I didn't study Germany aha, so I can't make the call for sure with this essay.

I'm pretty sure i did thematically in my essay plan but can't find it grrrr haha

[dancing phalanges]

THANK YOU SO SO SO MUCH!!!

All good was a good test to see how much i could recall generally

[JD99]

Haha okay! I can't find my essay plan on consolidation of power by nazis 1933-34  http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/hitlerconsolidaterev1.shtml
Do you think this site looks good enough? I know you didn't do Germany but those give all the main points of how it happened, just doesn't have any quotes or stats I think like my plan did, and would you recommend I categorise each into themes or just write out chronologically how they maintained power
Just looked I think almost all border on being political ahah

hey that website is cool thx!!

[fantasticbeasts3]

What are you struggling with with Detente? Anything I can help with?

I'd recommend against cramming in between your exams - give yourself a break Go take a walk, have something to eat. If you really feel like you need to study, just read over your past essays/plans, or any notes/detail tables you have written. But don't try and cram, because you'll just tire yourself out! Dancing phalanges suggestion is good as well - group discussion before exams was something that really benefitted me last year

my issue with detente is i can't remember anything from it so it's not the most ideal thing for me to write about :-/

i guess i won't cram then hahah there's just an overwhelming amount of content in modern, it felt like i was relearning the entire modern course in half a night 😫😫😫😭😭😭

side note: good luck for modern (if you're doing it tomorrow)! they (cssa) seem to LOVE throwing the weirdest questions in (*cough* legal) but we can do this!!!

[Claudiaa]

Has anyone studied the Arab Revolt in 1936-1939..I'm having a little trouble understanding what the revolt actually was! (i.e. what happened, and how it happened) It happened just after the Wailing Wall Riot but I still don't understand because in 1937 the Peel Report was released by Brits...who then revised it in favour of the Arabs? I don't understand why there was a shift in British policy as just prior to that in 1920 at the Sane Remo Conference, Brits were PRO Jew...supporting them to attain a Jewish homeland in Palestine....

So if anyone could clarify/explain on these revolts (i.e. why it happened, reason for British motives) It would be ever so greatly appreciated

[maria1999]

Hey Guys,

I'm struggling with the question ‘The impact of the Treaty of Versailles on the Weimar Republic to 1929 was more significant than any other factor’ how accurate is this statement?'

In particular i'm getting confused about what I should incorporate in order to make my argument more balanced. I was going to talk about the impacts in of the TOV in the first paragraph, the weaknesses of the Weimar Republic in the second and then the stresseman era in the third then talk about the great depression and the death of stresseman in 1929.

But, I feel like there is just way too much information to incorporate here and I don't know if I should spread out the impacts of Versailles and then in a small paragraph talk about other factors. It's honestly making me so confused....  and the timeline is confusing too....

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you 

hey!
I know you already got a stellar answer for this, but I tried to tackle a similar question in a practice essay and felt exactly how you felt. There are so many damn things to talk about and not nearly enough time. So for a question like this, I remember Susie saying that when they ask for a specific factor (in this question it's the ToV) you must talk about that factor first even if you don't think  it's that important. She also said you need to speak a little about how that factor interrelates to your other points in other paragraphs to back up your judgement. So here are some points I would maybe mention.

Paragraph 1:
I talked about the Treaty of Versailles itself and what it meant for the impact up until 1929. I know that in the modern lecture Susie said that when you're given a factors question or a factors essay you MUST address the factor that the question is asking first. Even if you don't think it's that significant. Essentially I said that it set Germany up for some really bad economic problems with the burden of the reperations ya know. I also said that it just created this inherent spite for democracy amongst Germans so the Republic just became this ever present reminder of failure and weakness.

Paragraph 2
I talked about the structural flaws and issues of the Weimar Republic
- This includes things like the proportional basis of the Reichstag and the powers of Article 48.
- Now here's your chance to say that although the ToV did contribute to this, some issues that the Weimar Republic had, they just created themselves i.e the inability to get the conservative elites who prefered authoritarian rule out of power

Paragraph 3
Now I didn't do this, but here seems like a good chance to talk about the rise of alternative leadership. The question stops right about the time that it was the Nazis' time to shine, so maybe speak about how all these issues made Germans become disillusioned with the current goverment and go to extreme ends of the political specturm for the solution. I think this was around the time when the SPD was hitting a new low so maybe some talk on that?

Now, I don't know if this is completly right but I hope it helps! Good luck for today!

[JD99]

GOOD LUCK EVERYBODY!!! 

[sudodds]

GOOD LUCK EVERYONE!! I'm sure going to all do absolutely fantastic <3

Just remember to stay calm, if you have maths in the morning get some rest, and to READ over the questions a few times, as CSSA is known to try and catch out those who aren't careful with confusing wording - make sure you are 100% sure what they are asking, before answering!!

Can't wait to hear how it all went!! Good luck xx

Susie

[dancing phalanges]

GOOD LUCK EVERYONE!! I'm sure going to all do absolutely fantastic <3

Just remember to stay calm, if you have maths in the morning get some rest, and to READ over the questions a few times, as CSSA is known to try and catch out those who aren't careful with confusing wording - make sure you are 100% sure what they are asking, before answering!!

Can't wait to hear how it all went!! Good luck xx

Susie

Thanks Susie! Just a quick question - if the CSSA asked about reasons for Japanese defeat and impact on civilians in occupied territories last year, what is the likelihood do you think either one of those pops up this year... just trying to make the most of my time right now

[evasgg]

Hi everyone! I just wanted to clarify something because I've gotten mixed answers. For a modern question that starts with 'to what extent...', for example, 'TO WHAT EXTENT WERE SOVIET ATTITUDES AND POLICIES UNDER GORBACHEV RESPONSIBLE FOR THE END OF THE COLD WAR?', should you talk about these attitudes and policies in one or two paragraphs and talk about other issues which contributed to the end of the Cold War in other paragraphs? Or talk about these attitudes and policies in every paragraph? Thanks so much!

[fantasticbeasts3]

Hi everyone! I just wanted to clarify something because I've gotten mixed answers. For a modern question that starts with 'to what extent...', for example, 'TO WHAT EXTENT WERE SOVIET ATTITUDES AND POLICIES UNDER GORBACHEV RESPONSIBLE FOR THE END OF THE COLD WAR?', should you talk about these attitudes and policies in one or two paragraphs and talk about other issues which contributed to the end of the Cold War in other paragraphs? Or talk about these attitudes and policies in every paragraph? Thanks so much!

i'm not the best person to give advice on essay structure, and i haven't done that part of the cold war, but to answer your question, mention all those issues, because you need to show that although there were soviet attitudes and policies under gorbachev that may have had a role in ending the cold war, there's other stuff as well. structuring essays based on issues is great, but if you introduce another issue that's not just about soviet attitudes you should say something like "despite soviet attitudes and policies under gorbachev being a factor towards the end of the cold war, there was also... (insert other issue here)."

this was a really crap answer and i'm pretty sure susie will give you something a lot better so take what i said with a grain of salt lmao

[dancing phalanges]

i'm not the best person to give advice on essay structure, and i haven't done that part of the cold war, but to answer your question, mention all those issues, because you need to show that although there were soviet attitudes and policies under gorbachev that may have had a role in ending the cold war, there's other stuff as well. structuring essays based on issues is great, but if you introduce another issue that's not just about soviet attitudes you should say something like "despite soviet attitudes and policies under gorbachev being a factor towards the end of the cold war, there was also... (insert other issue here)."

this was a really crap answer and i'm pretty sure susie will give you something a lot better so take what i said with a grain of salt lmao

Don't worry because even though I don't do Soviet either what you said sounds good! Both of my essays I wrote yesterday on Germany and Conflict in the Pacific were these type of questions (without giving too much away haha). I basically wrote about the main part of the question (eg. in this case soviet attitudes and policies under gorbachev) for 2-3 pages then after that any other point I brought up I would either link back by saying as you said - however, there were other reasons for ____ proving that attitudes and policies were not solely responsible for the end of the cold war. I also when I could, because it can show extra sophistication, (I can't really explain it that well without giving away one of the germany questions yesterday aha) I took the core issue in the essay and showed how it wasn't solely responsible for _____ because ____ took advantage of the issue itself to bring about the change that the question stipulates ahhaha sorry that makes no sense, i just can't write it without obviously giving away a german option but otherwise the option you talked about is definitely okay!

[sudodds]

Thanks Susie! Just a quick question - if the CSSA asked about reasons for Japanese defeat and impact on civilians in occupied territories last year, what is the likelihood do you think either one of those pops up this year... just trying to make the most of my time right now

Hey!! Sorry, just realised I missed this question. Though probably not as relevant now, just fyi cos kinda related one of the Russia questions this year was quite similar to last year imo, so it cropping up the year before is definitely no guarantee that it won't crop up again this year (same for HSC!)

Hi everyone! I just wanted to clarify something because I've gotten mixed answers. For a modern question that starts with 'to what extent...', for example, 'TO WHAT EXTENT WERE SOVIET ATTITUDES AND POLICIES UNDER GORBACHEV RESPONSIBLE FOR THE END OF THE COLD WAR?', should you talk about these attitudes and policies in one or two paragraphs and talk about other issues which contributed to the end of the Cold War in other paragraphs? Or talk about these attitudes and policies in every paragraph? Thanks so much!

You've already received some fantastic answers already, so not much for me to add, but yes you most certainly can, and should discuss the other factors! This is a differentiated essay, so in your judgement, I'd be saying that yes, Soviet attitudes under Reagan were highly significant, but were not solely responsible for the end of the cold war, as other factors where also highly significant. So when I wrote this essay, I did a paragraph on soviet attitudes under Gorbachev (this was my first paragraph as well!), then a paragraph on the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, US attitudes under Reagan and then finally the disarmament agreements