HSC Stuff > Marking Thread Archives

Modern History Essay Marking

<< < (36/41) > >>

dancing phalanges:
Hi Susie,
Just wondering if you can take a look at my source analysis, especially on making it more succinct and making a stronger argument I guess.
I've attached the 2012 HSC and I'm sure you know where to find the sources that are copyrighted ;)
https://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/hsc_exams/hsc2012exams/pdf_doc/2012-hsc-exam-modern-history.pdf
Thanks!
https://www.dropbox.com/preview/SOURCE%20ANALYSIS%202012.docx?role=personal

mixel:

--- Quote from: jelena on July 20, 2017, 09:31:33 am ---Spoiler Hey :) Just wondering if you could give this essay a look cause my teacher was a bit confused about how to answer it so I kind of just made my own way. Thanks!

Question: To what extent was Nazi racial policy the key factor in the consolidation of Nazi power in Germany up to 1939?

Nazi racial policy was only a partially key factor in the consolidation of Nazi power in Germany up to 1939. The significance of other methods by which they asserted their dominance, detracts from the nonetheless prominent significance of their racial policy. The nationalist ideology imbedded in their wider Nazi ideology underpinned racial policy in Germany during this time, which was fundamental to its influence in consolidating power. There were two main functions of Nazism which assisted the Nazis’ ascent to power; firstly their social vilification of targeted races as an outlet for public tensions, and secondly, their discrimination, which provided a sense of unity as an antithesis social and political instability of the preceding Republic. However, there were certainly other factors which were significant, particularly in the earlier stages of consolidating power. Thus, Nazi racial policy was one of a number of key factors in the consolidation of Nazi power, and thus only partially “the” key factor up to 1939.

Nazi ideology underpinned the racial policies which partially fuelled their ascension to power up to 1939. Nationalism formed a large constituent of their ideology, of which racism and xenophobia was often a prominent factor as it encouraged the promotion of one’s nation above others’. This was based in Hitler’s conception of social Darwinism, by which he believed that the Aryans were genetically superior to all other races- particularly Jews, Gypsies, and Slavs. This led to the notion of herrenvolk (racial purity) which underpinned racial policy, and thus aided in the Nazi consolidation of power up to 1939.

British historian Richard Overy, suggests that there are four distinct phases of Nazi racial policy, the first of these, vilification, is demonstrative of a fashion by which Nazi racial policy contributed to the consolidation of power. ‘Dolchstosslegende’ necessitated an enemy to be targeted as an outlet for German sufferinf and humiliation following the 1919 Treaty of Versaille, and Jewish people were generalised as constituents of the ‘November Criminals’. Thus they were held responsible for the subsequent hyper-inflation of 1923 which Allan Bullock said ‘undermined the foundations of German society’. On the back of further suffering caused by the October 1929 Depression from which over 6 million were unemployed by 1933, Germans sought somebody to blame, and Nazi racial policy allowed the party to provide an enemy in the Jews, thus stabilizing Germany socially and thus their power. This entailed such vilified races to be targeted by the simplistic and emotive propaganda under Goebbels, often involving caricatures and zoomorphism such as in Der Strümer’s 1938 school reading book, ‘The Poisonous Mushroom’. Furthermore, physical assaults upon such minorities were not punished throughout their early policy. However, a testament to the limited effect of early racial policies in consolidating power, was the Nazi’s initial caution with such policies, due to a lack of support from the middle class and city areas. However, this initial vilification of racial minorities through making them a target of social anger, was effective in consolidating power to an extent.

Discrimination and separation were the subsequent phases of Nazi racial policy suggested by Richard Overy, successful in providing a sense of unity amongst the German people under Nazi ideology, therefore affirming their position. The effects of social, political and economic instability in the Weimar Republic, saw a public vastly polarised. This was evidenced in the September 1930 Reichstag election, in which the extreme right (SPD)’s Reichstag representation increased from 12 to 107 seats, and the extreme left (KPD) won 77 seats. Consequently, discrimination regulations such as ‘The Law of Overcrowding German schools’, as well as the April 1 boycott on Jewish businesses, provided a sense of unified superiority amongst Germans under Nazi ideology. The separation stage of Nazi racial policy, evidenced a deepening of this approach, with the Reich Citizenship Act and the Blood Protection Act, announced at the Nuremberg Rally in September 1935. Consequently, it can be said that Nazi racial policy contributed to the consolidation of their power, through the ability to unify Germany under their ideology.

The demonstration of Nazi power and terror through the persecution of racial minorities, and particularly Jews, also assisted in the consolidation of power. William S Shirer writes that “... the Jews had been excluded either by law or by Nazi terror- the latter often preceded the former-“. This was encapsulated in the violent events of Kristallnacht in November 1938, in which almost 1000 Jewish shops and businesses were looted, and 20 000 Jewish men and boys were rounded up over the next few days to be sent to concentration camps. Hitler’s January 1939 speech, reinforced the sum of Nazi power, which was exhibited against the Jews, and which contributed to their wider consolidation, saying ‘...if the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations into a world war, then the result will... (be) the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe.’ Consequently, the display of might which helped the Nazis to assert their dominance over racial minorities, also assisted in assisting their police terror state.

Nazi racial policy however, was not crucial to the extent of other factors, to the consolidation of Nazi power. These factors included political intrigue such as the 1933 Enabling Act, allowing Hitler dictatorial powers, as well as the ‘despair and hopelessness’ which Michael Burleigh described as engendered from Weimar ‘instability combined with chronic economic problems’, such problems particularly encompassing the Depression of 1929, which AJP Taylor describes to have ‘put wind in Hitler’s sails’. Each of these key factors, completely disengaged from racial policy, were axiomatic to Hitler’s consolidation of power.

Nazi racial policy was thus not wholly “the” key factor in the consolidation of power to 1939, however it was significant. The ideology which underpinned this was fundamental to the regime, and the policies which constituted Nazi racism did in fact contribute to their assertion of dominance. However, the comparative importance of other factors in fulfilling this function, evidence that it was not necessarily an exclusively axiomatic factor, despite its undeniable importance to the consolidation of Nazi power to 1939.
--- End quote ---
Hey, I did this question a few days ago  ;D
Just some quick feedback:

- Very good use of historiography: there's not much I could except that Daniel Goldhagen's "Hitler's Willing Executioners" characterisation of German society (whether you agree with it or not -- it can be pretty extreme) makes a good counterfactual if you want to go further down the chicken or egg route of whether Nazi propaganda and rule made Germany antisemitic, or whether antisemitism put Nazis in power. If you're going with the former, it makes a very good case that racial policy was used to polarise German society against an internal enemy that endangered the prosperity of the Volksgemeinschaft, and thus consolidate Nazi power by justifying more restrictions on civil liberties.

- It's good that you gravitated towards a differentiated thesis on this question, because questions from this section of the Germany syllabus (3: Nazism in power or something) are usually designed to give wide scope for interpretation / debate. However, I think you'd be making it quite hard for yourself to disagree much with this specific question. It seems that you've had issues sustaining your thesis. 4/5 of your paragraphs affirm the question (and do a very good job of it, with loads of detail), but your last paragraph is considerably shorter than the other ones and only refers to Hitler's political manipulation vis a vis the Enabling Act and the NSDAP's populism in light of the Great Depression. This is problematic, because both of these could be just as easily used to justify how key racial policy was in consolidating the NSDAP's power -- some of the first political decrees Hitler made after passing the enabling was the dissolution of other parties on the basis of their Jewish membership (basically every party except the NSDAP and the DNVP) and the Law for the Restoration of a Professional Civil Service, which banned Jews from any public office (both of these empowered the NSDAP greatly); and the populism with which Hitler responded to the Depression advocated the nationalisation of Jewish property (which they got around to in 1938 I think). To address this imbalance in your argument, I'd suggest simply changing your thesis to moderately affirm with the question; perhaps with a negative caveat because that would match your current analysis.

- This is a minor thing, but I mention it because my teacher roasted me for leaving it out -- the racial policy went far beyond antisemitism. You can still get very high marks only discussing antisemitism, but because that's all most students centre their essays on this topic around, you'll stand out if you mention the German affirming aspects as well. You've already alluded to it with the Herrenvolk idea, but you could flesh this out: early German nationalism a la the Volkisch movement; Himmler and the SS's weird dungeons and dragons esque fairy tales where they portrayed themselves as the new Teutonic Order, the Liebensborn / Motherhood encouraging programs that accorded certain medals and respect to women who birthed more than 9 children so that Hitler could fulfil his dream of colonising the Ukraine with 20 million Germans in 20 years, etc. These are just minor aspects of the racial policy, but they're good because they intersect with other dot points in this section of the Germany syllabus and make your analysis shine; especially if you argue how they were used to enforce conformity and therefore consolidate Nazi power.

Hope that helps. I really am splitting hairs here because this is already a great essay  :)

jakesilove:

--- Quote from: mixel on July 23, 2017, 12:35:24 pm ---Hey, I did this question a few days ago  ;D
Just some quick feedback:

- Very good use of historiography: there's not much I could except that Daniel Goldhagen's "Hitler's Willing Executioners" characterisation of German society (whether you agree with it or not -- it can be pretty extreme) makes a good counterfactual if you want to go further down the chicken or egg route of whether Nazi propaganda and rule made Germany antisemitic, or whether antisemitism put Nazis in power. If you're going with the former, it makes a very good case that racial policy was used to polarise German society against an internal enemy that endangered the prosperity of the Volksgemeinschaft, and thus consolidate Nazi power by justifying more restrictions on civil liberties.

- It's good that you gravitated towards a differentiated thesis on this question, because questions from this section of the Germany syllabus (3: Nazism in power or something) are usually designed to give wide scope for interpretation / debate. However, I think you'd be making it quite hard for yourself to disagree much with this specific question. It seems that you've had issues sustaining your thesis. 4/5 of your paragraphs affirm the question (and do a very good job of it, with loads of detail), but your last paragraph is considerably shorter than the other ones and only refers to Hitler's political manipulation vis a vis the Enabling Act and the NSDAP's populism in light of the Great Depression. This is problematic, because both of these could be just as easily used to justify how key racial policy was in consolidating the NSDAP's power -- some of the first political decrees Hitler made after passing the enabling was the dissolution of other parties on the basis of their Jewish membership (basically every party except the NSDAP and the DNVP) and the Law for the Restoration of a Professional Civil Service, which banned Jews from any public office (both of these empowered the NSDAP greatly); and the populism with which Hitler responded to the Depression advocated the nationalisation of Jewish property (which they got around to in 1938 I think). To address this imbalance in your argument, I'd suggest simply changing your thesis to moderately affirm with the question; perhaps with a negative caveat because that would match your current analysis.

- This is a minor thing, but I mention it because my teacher roasted me for leaving it out -- the racial policy went far beyond antisemitism. You can still get very high marks only discussing antisemitism, but because that's all most students centre their essays on this topic around, you'll stand out if you mention the German affirming aspects as well. You've already alluded to it with the Herrenvolk idea, but you could flesh this out: early German nationalism a la the Volkisch movement; Himmler and the SS's weird dungeons and dragons esque fairy tales where they portrayed themselves as the new Teutonic Order, the Liebensborn / Motherhood encouraging programs that accorded certain medals and respect to women who birthed more than 9 children so that Hitler could fulfil his dream of colonising the Ukraine with 20 million Germans in 20 years, etc. These are just minor aspects of the racial policy, but they're good because they intersect with other dot points in this section of the Germany syllabus and make your analysis shine; especially if you argue how they were used to enforce conformity and therefore consolidate Nazi power.

Hope that helps. I really am splitting hairs here because this is already a great essay  :)

--- End quote ---

You. Absolute. Legend. How good is this feedback!

sudodds:

--- Quote from: jakesilove on July 23, 2017, 01:20:02 pm ---You. Absolute. Legend. How good is this feedback!

--- End quote ---
defs showing us up aye ;) Absolutely amazing feedback, mixel - every one of your (ever growing) posts makes me smile :D

Also dancing phalanges - I'll take a look over your source analysis as soon as I can, don't worry, haven't forgotten about cha ;)

dancing phalanges:

--- Quote from: sudodds on July 23, 2017, 04:51:32 pm ---defs showing us up aye ;) Absolutely amazing feedback, mixel - every one of your (ever growing) posts makes me smile :D

Also dancing phalanges - I'll take a look over your source analysis as soon as I can, don't worry, haven't forgotten about cha ;)

--- End quote ---

Sweet as! Thanks :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page