How the Versailles Treaty Contributed to Hitlers Rise

In 1919, a defeated Germany was presented with peace terms by the victorious powers of World War I. Germany wasn’t invited to negotiate and was given a stark choice: sign or be invaded. Perhaps inevitably, given the years of mass bloodshed German leaders had caused, the result was the Treaty of Versailles. But from the start, the terms of the treaty caused anger, hate, and revulsion across German society. Versailles was called a diktat, a dictated peace. The German Empire from 1914 was split up, the military carved to the bone, and huge reparations demanded. The treaty caused turmoil in the new, highly troubled Weimar Republic, but, although Weimar survived  into the 1930s, it can be argued that key provisions of the Treaty contributed to the rise of Adolf Hitler. The Treaty of Versailles was criticized at the time by some voices among the victors, including economists such as John Maynard Keynes. Some claimed the treaty would simply delay a resumption of war for a few decades, and when Hitler rose to power in the 1930s and started a  second world war, these predictions seemed prescient. In the years after World War II, many commentators pointed to the treaty as being a key enabling factor. Others, however, praised the Treaty of Versailles and said the connection between the treaty and the Nazis was minor. Yet Gustav Stresemann, the best-regarded politician of the Weimar era, was constantly trying to counter the terms of the treaty and restore German power. The Stabbed in the Back Myth At the end of World War I, the Germans offered an armistice to their enemies, hoping negotiations could take place under the Fourteen Points of Woodrow Wilson. However, when the treaty was presented to the German delegation, with no chance to negotiate, they had to accept a peace that many in Germany saw as arbitrary and unfair. The signatories and the Weimar government that had sent them were seen by many as the November Criminals. Some Germans believed this outcome had been planned. In the later years of the war, Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff had been in command of Germany. Ludendorff called for a peace deal but, desperate to shift the blame for defeat away from the military, he handed power to the new government to sign the treaty while the military stood back, claiming it hadn’t been defeated but had been betrayed by the new leaders. In the years after the war, Hindenburg claimed the army had been stabbed in the back. Thus the military escaped blame. When Hitler rose to power in the 1930s, he repeated the claim that the military had been stabbed in the back and that surrender terms had been dictated. Can the Treaty of Versailles be blamed for Hitlers rise to power? The terms of the treaty, such as Germanys acceptance of blame for the war, allowed myths to flourish. Hitler was obsessed with the belief that Marxists and Jews had been behind the failure in World War I and had to be removed to prevent failure in World War II. The Collapse of the German Economy It can be argued that Hitler may not have taken power without the massive economic depression that struck the world, including Germany, in the late 1920s. Hitler promised a way out, and a disaffected populace turned to him. It can also be argued Germany’s economic troubles at this time were due—at least in part—to the Treaty of Versailles. The victors in World War I had spent a colossal sum of money, which had to be paid back. The ruined continental landscape and economy had to be rebuilt. France and Britain were facing huge bills, and the answer for many was to make Germany pay. The amount to be repaid in reparations was huge, set at $63 billion at the time, later reduced to $33 billion and finally $28 billion. But just as Britains effort to make American colonists pay for the French and Indian War backfired, so did reparations. It wasn’t the cost that proved the problem since reparations had been all but neutralized after the 1932 Lausanne Conference, but the way the German economy became massively dependent on American investment and loans. This was fine when the American economy was surging, but when it collapsed during the Great Depression Germany’s economy was ruined as well. Soon six million people were unemployed, and the populace became drawn to right-wing nationalists. It’s been argued that the economy was liable to collapse even if America’s had stayed strong because of Germanys problems with foreign finance. It also has been argued that leaving pockets of Germans in other nations via the territorial settlement in the Treaty of Versailles was always going to lead to conflict when Germany tried to reunite everyone. While Hitler used this as an excuse to attack and invade, his goals of conquest in Eastern Europe went far beyond anything that can be attributed to the Treaty of Versailles. Hitlers Rise to Power The Treaty of Versailles created a small army full of monarchist officers, a state within a state that remained hostile to the democratic Weimar Republic and that succeeding German governments didn’t engage with. This helped create a power vacuum, which the army tried to fill with  Kurt von Schleicher before backing Hitler. The small army left many ex-soldiers unemployed and ready to join the warring on the street. The Treaty of Versailles contributed greatly to the alienation many Germans felt about their civilian, democratic government. Combined with the actions of the military, this provided rich material Hitler used to gain support on the right. The treaty also triggered a process by which the German economy was rebuilt based on U.S. loans to satisfy a key point of Versailles, making the nation especially vulnerable when the Great Depression hit. Hitler exploited this, too, but these were just two elements in Hitler’s rise. The requirement for reparations, the political turmoil over dealing with them, and the rise and fall of governments, as a result, helped keep the wounds open and gave right-wing nationalists fertile ground to prosper.

Analysis Of David Hanson s Carnage And Culture Essay

Question2: In Carnage and Culture, Victor David Hanson expressed a slanted perspective about the crucial battles in western history in order to support his theory that western militaristic strategies are superior to alternative forms of warfare. He fostered his sentiments by explaining how specific battle tactics can unify or divide a nation in a matter of moments. However, his reference to the concept that western warriors continuously triumph in war, is expressed in a manner that does not fully evaluate both perspectives of the conflict. Hanson alluded to his message behind Carnage and Culture in his thesis: A sense of personal freedom, superior discipline, matchless weapons, egalitarian camaraderie, individual initiative, constant tactical adaptations, and flexibility, preference for shock battle of heavy infantry— were themselves the murderous dividend of Hellenic culture at large †¦ Yet for the past 2,500 years— even in the Dark Ages, well before the â€Å"Mi litary Revolution,† and not simply as a result of the Renaissance, the European discovery of the Americas, or the Industrial Revolution— there has been a peculiar practice of Western warfare, a common foundation and continual way of fighting, that has made Europeans the most deadly soldiers the history of civilizations. (Hanson 5-6) Although Hanson is able to give an overview of valuable battles that express western confidence and reflect the west’s brutal military tactics that, his analysis of the war does notShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of David Hanson s Carnage And Culture Essay1793 Words   |  8 PagesQuestion2: In Carnage and Culture Victor David Hanson expressed a slanted perspective about the crucial battles in western history in order to support his theory that western militaristic strategies are superior to alternative forms of warfare. He fostered his sentiments by explaining how specific battle tactics can unify or divide a nation in a matter of moments. However, his reference to the concept that western warriors continuously triumph in war, is expressed in a manner that does not fullyRead MoreIslamic Way of warfare23558 Words   |  95 Pages Major Intekhab Haider Khan 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORG REPORT NUMBER U.S. Army Command and General Staff College ATTN: ATZL-SWD-GD Fort Leavenworth, KS 66027-2301 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited 13Read MoreOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 Pagesmanaging, organizing and reflecting on both formal and informal structures, and in this respect you will find this book timely, interesting and valuable. Peter Holdt Christensen, Associate Professor, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark McAuley et al.’s book is thought-provoking, witty and highly relevant for understanding contemporary organizational dilemmas. The book engages in an imaginative way with a wealth of organizational concepts and theories as well as provides insightful examples from the

The Sunflower Free Essays

Melissa Torres Period: 2 2/9/13 The Sunflower Dear Simon Wiesenthal, After reading The Sunflower and having mixed emotions during this book I made my decision. â€Å"What would I have done? † I would have done the same thing you did. Just walk away from all of it. We will write a custom essay sample on The Sunflower or any similar topic only for you Order Now I believe it would be a tough situation to think about and have a response to right then and there. Like Deborah says in her essay, â€Å"The question to be asked is not should the prisoner have forgiven the SS man but could the prisoner have forgiven him? This is obviously saying that no one has the right to forgive anyone on behalf of another. This request brings up several moral questions like, Is it alright to forgive someone who has done no harm to you? Can a person forgive someone on behalf of others? Can anyone really forgive anyone else, or is forgiveness in the hands of a higher power? The soldier asked you for his forgiveness just because you are a Jew, and in the soldiers mind, all Jews are equal. Even though you weren’t burned alive, shot dead, or in any other heinous acts in the concentration camps. How could his forgiveness, had he granted it, put the soldier at rest about the hundreds of Jews he has been a party to the murder of? I think you had no right to forgive the soldier. The soldier didn’t commit a crime against you personally, and for you to forgive him would have been an empty phrase with no meaning. The soldier should have asked for forgiveness between himself and all the Jews he murdered. Sven Alkalaj I like that Sven included in his essay what he went through in Bosnia. I agree with Sven that Simon made a good decision not forgiving the soldier. Just as Sven asks in his essay, â€Å"Who is entitled to speak on behalf of the victims? † Simon didn’t have much of a say just because they didn’t torture him. Just like Sven says, Simon was unsure if his response to the dying soldier was okay. It was hard for Simon to get over his response and wanted other peoples opinions on his decision. When the nurse attempts to give Simon some of the soldiers possessions. Simon refuses the package. It obviously shows that he didn’t want to do much with the soldiers. The holocaust was a horrible thing, and the killing of thousands of Jews was not okay. Forgetting the crimes would be worse than forgiving the criminal who seeks forgiveness† It is such a atrocious thing, its hard to forget and Sven said it would be bad to forget everything that happened. The Dalai Lama I don’t agree with Lama. He says â€Å"one should forgive the person or persons who have committed atrocities against oneself and mankind. † I am totally against what he says because forgiving the soldier would mean that Simon is okay with what he did. The soldier didn’t really care if the Jew was tortured or not because he just asked the nurse to find a random Jew. I felt like the soldiers apology was a lie and he just wanted to die in peace. But he doesn’t really deserve it after everything he did. Lama also says â€Å"but that is not the Buddhist way,† Lama’s culture is different and believes that forgiveness is okay. But if Simon was to forgive the soldier, it wouldn’t bring back any of the people he killed. The Jews he killed are piled up dead and accepting his apology isn’t going to change a thing. All the awful things that happened will always be in Simon’s mind. Melissa Torres Period: 6 The Sunflower In The Sunflower, by Simon Wiesenthal the main character, Simon is put in an awkward situation and doesn’t really know how to deal with it. His development from the beginning of the book to the end of the book is kind of crazy. Towards the end of this book he realizes he made the right decision. Simon just needed a little bit of extra help to decipher if what he did was right. With condoning factors supporting the Nazi in The Sunflower is asking for forgiveness both out of guilt and amends, there is no possible way to decipher if he should or should not be forgiven. Simon was asked to go clean at a hospital. When he arrived at the hospital the nurse asked him if he was a Jew. Simon said yes and the nurse took him to the bedside of Karl, a 21-year old dying Nazi soldier. Karl was covered in bandages with openings only for his mouth, nose and ears. Karl wanted to tell Simon his story. Karl talked about his childhood and then the conversation came up to him being a Nazi. Karl admitted to shooting a mother, father and their two kids. Karl felt guilty about the hundred of Jews he killed and he didn’t want to die without coming clean to a Jew. Karl asked for forgiveness, he knew he was asking for too much from Simon but without his answer Karl couldn’t die in peace. Simon left the room without a word. When he returned to the hospital the next day, the same nurse came to Simon and told him that Karl had died. Over the next years of the war, time and time again, through all his suffering, Simon thought of Karl and wondered if he should have forgiven him. Over the years, every time Simon would enter a hospital, see a nurse, or a man covered with his head bandaged, he recalls Karl. Many years later Simon questioned whether he had done the right thing. He asked many people about his actions. A few of these people included Jews, Rabbis, a Catholic Cardinal, Christians and even an ex-Nazi. They all had different opinions and different reason of forgiveness. Faced with the choice between compassion and justice, silence and truth, Simon said nothing. Simon always wondered if he had done the right thing. As the book was coming to an end, Simon started noticing that he did the right think not forgiving Karl. Forgiving him wouldn’t bring back any of the people he killed. The Jews he killed are piled up dead and accepting his apology isn’t going to change a thing. Karl didn’t commit a crime against Simon personally, and for Simon to forgive Karl would have been an empty phrase with no meaning. Karl should have asked for forgiveness between himself and all the Jews he murdered. The main character’s development throughout the book showed that at first Simon wasn’t confident with his decision and always had the situation on the back of his mind. But towards the end of the book, Simon notices he did make the right decision to just get up, walk away without saying a word. Simon basically needed other peoples opinions to see that he had done the right thing. How to cite The Sunflower, Essay examples

Everyday Life Multiculturalism

Questions: 1.Introduce and explore an example of bridging work or multiculturalism from below. Your answer must make use of the ideas we have discussed about everyday multiculturalism.2. Describe an example of a work practice or context that is gendered and describe how social systems sustain this everyday gendering of work.3. Using an example, explain how the discourses and technologies of medicine have expanded into areas of our everyday lives not previously considered as medical problems. Answers: 1. In Amanda Wises Multiculturalism from Below, different examples are given of incidents of multiculturalism in Australia. The incidents were collected from interviews conducted in Griffith and Ashfield. These two places are home to people from different cultural background. In these incidents, one example can be taken of Lakshmi, the Indian immigrant who moved to Ashfield. She built a transversal goods exchange relationship with her Lebanese neighbor Frank first, then with her Italian and Anglo-Celtic neighbors. The circulation of vegetables, fruits and seeds is a way of facilitating sociality across a broad area. Because of this kind of exchanges, the Australian backyards have grown diversely, just like the countrys culture. Such exchanges exhibit a micro-moral-economy, which is a result of exchange of surplus produce. These exchanges and gifting aids are building relationships between neighbors or kin (Harris, 2013). These kind of friendly atmosphere forms a diverse cultural back ground in households. The individuals who are at the centre of these exchanges might not be aware of their contribution to the development of social relationships and cultural intersections. The exchanged materials are what that matters the most. Gifts come with a personal touch, a thought and sensual quality. In the incident mentioned, food as a product facilitates exchange of recipes and their traditional histories. The nature of the food mixes with the emotions of reciprocity and care represented in the gifts. Such transversal exchanges can generate sensory and descriptive intersections that could result in cross cultural relations and networks (Flowers Swan, 2012). 2. Gender bias is a controversial issue in todays world. Such biases make the workplace environment edgy and the possibility of lawsuits being filed high. Keeping the lawsuits aside, it is to be understood that gender bias is a prejudice and discrimination and should not be present in organizations. However, these incidents can be easily fond occurring in companies, and in different forms (Bohnet, Van Geen Bazerman, 2015). The most common form of bias that can be seen is the allocation of responsibilities between men and women in organizations. If any task that requires heavy lifting or physical exertion, men are mostly approached to complete it. If a woman even volunteers to help in the task, she is dealt with an offhanded behavior that she is not capable enough, or cannot help in completing the job. Studies can show that the women can defeat men in tasks that people cannot even think of. This kind of behavior shows that at workplace such inequality is common and accepted. These kinds of incidents are mirrored in standard positional responsibilities also. Women are generally considered more suitable for secretarial work, and not for first line responsibilities. This sort of gender bias is extensively prevalent in all kinds of business organizations. Because of this kind of discriminations organizations lose out on hiring the best candidate for a job. Hiring must be one on the basis skills and experien ce, and not on gender. Organizations should be open to the idea of women working in roles that are traditionally filled in by men and vice versa (Heilman, 2012). 3. It is widely known that modern medicines have made huge advancements in the last couple of years and many consider them as a huge revolution. It obviously has its own benefits; however, it has its own side effects too. A major side effect can be considered in the form of usage of medicines in cases that are not considered conventional medical problems in terms of healthcare organizations and physicians. Such usage can sometimes even result in iatrogenic deaths, or death caused by doctors. Advancements in medicine become questionable in such cases, in terms of necessity, outcome or application. Earlier forms of traditional and proven effective medications have been ridiculed and put away, without even understanding their purpose or affectivity. In old times, medicines were provided by the physicians after proper diagnosis and checking the intensity. If illnesses were less serious, like common cold, and were solvable with time and a little care or rest, then there were generally no issuances of medicines or remedies (Hillier Jewell, 2013). The situation has altered in todays world. Even at the displaying of minor symptoms of common illnesses, people start taking medicines, without understanding how much dosage is required, if at all required or not, and before even consulting with any physician. Popping of a couple of over-the-counter paracetamol tablets solve the issue. Like in cases of high blood pressure, drugs are used to drop the pressure before understanding why the body is reacting like that in the first place. The situation has come to this stage because of the easily available remedies and presence of chemist shops everywhere. Over-the counter medicines have acted as a catalyst in these situations. Convincing and consistent traditional treatments or prescribing from doctors have no more use today (Leder Krucoff, 2014). References Bohnet, I., Van Geen, A., Bazerman, M. (2015). When Performance Trumps Gender Bias: Joint vs. Separate Evaluation.Management Science,62(5), 1225-1234. Flowers, R., Swan, E. (2012). Eating the Asian other? Pedagogies of food multiculturalism in Australia.PORTAL Journal of Multidisciplinary International Studies,9(2), 1-30. Harris, A. (2013). Everyday multiculturalism in Australia.Peace and culture,5(1), 31-37. Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias.Research in organizational Behavior,32, 113-135. Hillier, S. M., Jewell, T. (2013).Health care and traditional medicine in China 1800-1982. Routledge. Leder, D., Krucoff, M. W. (2014). Take your pill: the role and fantasy of pills in modern medicine.The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine,20(6), 421-427.