HSC Modern History Question Thread

[HamBurr17]

(b) Evaluate Hitler’s role in the Nazi state between 1933 and 1939.

How would i go about answering this question? I don't know where to begin and any help will be very appreciated 

Hmm, I think I would maybe talk about the propaganda aspect - Fuherprinzip/Hitler myth
Also some of the things he did politically - Enabling Act, going against the Treaty of Versailles etc.

Hope that helps

[Dylpickle01]

(b) Evaluate Hitler’s role in the Nazi state between 1933 and 1939.

How would i go about answering this question? I don't know where to begin and any help will be very appreciated 

Hey! So for something like this, I think you would need to talk about the range of historian's perspectives about Hitler and his role. For example, much debate stemmed around whether or not he was directly involved in the policy and decision making of the state. A few other things you could talk about:
- Intentionalism: did Hitler intentionally manipulate the state as he saw fit?
- Delegation: why did Hitler avoid making major decisions, passing them off to high ranking officials like Himmler?
- Leadership: was he actually a strong, decisive leader? or could he be easily manipulated by the people around him? I'd talk about his personality here too

I hope this helps! Let us know if there is anything else you need help with ^.^

[edvinat]

Hi!
This might sound like a stupid question butttt with Germany they always give you one question about the period 1918-1933 and focus it around the republic and another post 1933 focusing on the nazis. Is it a bad idea to know the period from 1918-1933 in depth (since its what im usually better at explaining) and only know post 1933 briefly or is that risky?

[fantasticbeasts3]

Hi!
This might sound like a stupid question butttt with Germany they always give you one question about the period 1918-1933 and focus it around the republic and another post 1933 focusing on the nazis. Is it a bad idea to know the period from 1918-1933 in depth (since its what im usually better at explaining) and only know post 1933 briefly or is that risky?

hey!

i asked my teacher a while ago about studying just one section... imagine our class's disappointment when he said no. simply because they could ask a super broad question (one year, the time period was 1918-33!) sure, there's 2 options, but if you get a really bad question for the one you studied, and the other one's easier, what are you going to do then? you get me?

best of luck for your hsc,
fantasticbeasts

[edvinat]

hey!

i asked my teacher a while ago about studying just one section... imagine our class's disappointment when he said no. simply because they could ask a super broad question (one year, the time period was 1918-33!) sure, there's 2 options, but if you get a really bad question for the one you studied, and the other one's easier, what are you going to do then? you get me?

best of luck for your hsc,
fantasticbeasts

Hey,

Yeah completely get where you're coming from! Thank you! I just thought It would be easier to understand if I didn't have to remember as many stats, but its better to always know everything. I'll eventually get there!

Thank you, you too

[dancing phalanges]

hey definitely should study both as past questions have included:
How effective was the Nazi party up to 1939 in dealing with the political, economic and social issues arising from the Weimar Republic?
Germany between 1918 and 1939 was the triumph of nationalism over democracy.
To what extent is this statement accurate?
that is in 2016 and 2015 and those were the 'weimar' questions so definitely try know both!

[mbdtHSC]

Hi, for anyone doing Conflict in the Pacific, any ideas on how you'd structure a question about reasons for the defeat of Japan?

I've come up with:
Allied economic + technological superiority, different instances of Allied might/superiority (Midway -> Guadalcanal -> island hopping ) and flawed Japanese strategies (overstretched military etc)

[dancing phalanges]

Hi, for anyone doing Conflict in the Pacific, any ideas on how you'd structure a question about reasons for the defeat of Japan?

I've come up with:
Allied economic + technological superiority, different instances of Allied might/superiority (Midway -> Guadalcanal -> island hopping ) and flawed Japanese strategies (overstretched military etc)

all are great ideas! only other ones i can suggest is the allied air raids on the japanese home front and a-bomb as smaller short term reasons

[ruponti.atiq]

what are some HSC predictions for Russia and the Soviet Union/ Conflict in Indochina ?

[sudodds]

what are some HSC predictions for Russia and the Soviet Union/ Conflict in Indochina ?

Hey! I mentioned earlier, but of course always take predictions with a pinch heavy hand of salt. All of these are nothing more than guesses, and if Paper 1 and 2 have taught us anything, is that patterns ("last year they didn't have a visual text, that means they'll definitely have one this year!") don't exist.

However, my hunch of Russia, is that you'll get one question of power struggles, and one on soviet foreign policy. The combination has never been done before, and NESA knows that these two topics are the least studied by students who think that there will always be at least a Bolshevik Consolidation or Stalinism question. I didn't study Conflict in Indochina, so unfortunately I'll have just have to leave that for someone else aha.

[flashguts321]

Hi sudodds,

I've been studying Russia but am not sure of what to write in the power struggles question? To be honest, I have prepared everything else and wasn't even sure that was a possibility.

I guess I'm just wondering what an example of a power struggles question would be, and some of the main points you should address?

Thanks in advance. Really appreciate all the help

[fantasticbeasts3]

hey guys,

i might've asked this question before... but anyway: what are some tips to do well in the personality section? i've never gotten above 20/25 for it and my teacher didn't give specific tips to make it better. i've been told to include more detail, but is there anything else i can do?

thanks!!

also: under the geopolitical movements dot point in detente, how relevant is all the stuff in the middle east? in class, we were given background on it (suez crisis, stuff like that) but how much of the background is relevant? do i just start talking about the middle east from the six-day war in 1967? does that make sense ahahahah i can rephrase if needed

[Primallis]

Hello people,

With the Spanish Civil War, I know it falls under the Collapse of Collective Security dot point but could it also be interpreted as a policy of appeasement since Britain and France only provided basic medical relief to the Republicans so too not start a future war with the Fascist powers? AJP Taylor states that the League was already ''dead" by this point so it was basically the policy of appeasement by Britain and France being used to subdue Hitler & Mussolini rather than the league? Just wanted to hear people's thoughts.

Good luck my fellow Modern Students.

Bump - Seemed to have Got Lost In Translation

[marcusgrahamm]

I was doing a few personality questions before and I came across:
Part A) "Outline the background and historical context of your personality"
I'm doing J Edgar Hoover.
I was wondering how you would structure this question?

[fantasticbeasts3]

I was doing a few personality questions before and I came across:
Part A) "Outline the background and historical context of your personality"
I'm doing J Edgar Hoover.
I was wondering how you would structure this question?

the syllabus points can be used as your paragraphs. :-)