HSC Modern History Question Thread

[Mada438]

Edit: damn owidjaja beat me to it by 43 seconds cya

Always annoying when someone beats you to the punch!

Definitely! I was working on a question from the 2017 paper and it was about Nazi Party achieving total power- the Night of the Long Knives should be a short paragraph but you should be able to talk about how it gave the Nazis the opportunity to eliminate political opponents and secure support from the reichswehr.

Olivia, do you reckon i could have a copy of your germany notes? 

[AJ2019]

Hey!
I'm studying Leon Trotsky for the personality study and wondering how to approach a couple of questions:

1.To what extent did Trotsky have a positive impact on his time?
This question is so weird! I mean Trotsky definitely had a great impact on his time, through events such as 1905, 1917, the Civil War, etc. but assesing to what extent it was positive seems really difficult without judging whether or not socialism itself was positive for Russia. So how would you go about answering this question, and like what would you put in each of your body paragraphs

2. “History is about winners.” How accurate is this statement in relation to Trotsky?
Again I feel this is kind of weird. Was Trotsky a winner?

[fun_jirachi]

Hey!
I'm studying Leon Trotsky for the personality study and wondering how to approach a couple of questions:

1.To what extent did Trotsky have a positive impact on his time?
This question is so weird! I mean Trotsky definitely had a great impact on his time, through events such as 1905, 1917, the Civil War, etc. but assesing to what extent it was positive seems really difficult without judging whether or not socialism itself was positive for Russia. So how would you go about answering this question, and like what would you put in each of your body paragraphs

2. “History is about winners.” How accurate is this statement in relation to Trotsky?
Again I feel this is kind of weird. Was Trotsky a winner?

Hi,
 
I'm not really too sure about this, someone pls back me up
1. Part B question
TWE did Trotsky have a positive impact on his time
I'd probably look at three events, and make a judgement on what sort of impact he had on his time as a result of his action in those events
I think judgement sorta depends which events you focus on
i'd probably do 1905, 1917, Civil War for my paragraphs in that order. it can be argued that he had a positive impact on his time, making the Bolshevik regime secure and successful. Also its so much easier to argue and there are mounds of info
in terms of if socialism was positive for russia i'd say yes because it heralded in a new age of Russian greatness, so it can be argued that Trotsky was a driving force for this change through his action in events such as 1905, 1917 and Civil War
my overall judgement would be yes he had a positive impact on his time, he essentially made russia great again until he was unceremoniously deported by stalin (if we ignore brest-litovsk and the miniscule bits of garbage he did in between)

2. Ultimately for all his evangelical work trotsky was not a winner
in relation to trotsky this statement is totally inaccurate
his fourth international was complete garbage, he did basically nothing abroad, he got deported a ton of times, and his work in russia amounted to almost nothing as stalin established a totalitarian regime
in addition his books and other works were basically taboo, so post 1929 he was a complete loser in everything right up until he got icepicked by mercader RIP
you can look into his works, the Fourth international and his time abroad in France and Mexico
so no i dont think trotsky was a winner
EDIT: i somehow omitted the power struggle completely, but he got completely snitched out by stalin, so for this question I think that for this question I'd do three events (power struggle, two things from time in exile)

someone pls back up or deny
hopefully this answers ur question

[vic321]

HI,

So for the personality of Albert Speer, what would you include if part a was on his rise to prominence? Would you talk about his work as armaments minister since at that time he had already rose to prominence??

Thoughts??

[Mada438]

HI,

So for the personality of Albert Speer, what would you include if part a was on his rise to prominence? Would you talk about his work as armaments minister since at that time he had already rose to prominence??

Thoughts??

It would depend i reckon. Because if you're talking about it from a global perspective then yes.
But otherwise, i think you'd have to make a judgement. Because you can debate the point of when he really became prominent. I would argue that this was during his appointment as ‘First Architect of the Reich’. Anything before this would be applicable to the question then in my eyes. But it's up to you; you can interpret it differently. Just as long as you argue why you believe that event is important in leading to his rise to prominence and why it is valid and your argument is sound, then you should be sweet. 
Hope this helps!

[LochNess Monster]

PLEASE HELP!!! Kind of urgent.

So I have a Trials exam coming up.
This is a question they have given us beforehand for Personality Gorbachev: It is the way an individual faces challenges that shapes them and their achievements.” To what extent is this statement accurate in relation to the personality you have studied and their role in history?

I get Part a) but Part b) has me so confused. How do I even begin to write an essay on this??? (Trying to prep and cram before be like    ...)

I want to say he's totally a visionary. I'm a BIGGG Gorbachev fan.
Also, he wans't just responding to Reagan but he was The Guy ending the Cold War. US Presidents came and went but Gorb's visions and ideal to end the Cold War remained.

Furthermore, Gorbachev moved up ranks, was presented with big challenges (domestically and externally) but excelled to the best of his ability in dealing with these issues.

So, sure, what if he did collapse the Soviet Union? Nah, big deal. It was gonna collapse anyways. 

Anyway, PLEASE HELP ASAP.
Anyone who has finished this course and arrived safely...please.

[Mada438]

PLEASE HELP!!! Kind of urgent.

So I have a Trials exam coming up.
This is a question they have given us beforehand for Personality Gorbachev: It is the way an individual faces challenges that shapes them and their achievements.” To what extent is this statement accurate in relation to the personality you have studied and their role in history?

I get Part a) but Part b) has me so confused. How do I even begin to write an essay on this??? (Trying to prep and cram before be like    ...)

I want to say he's totally a visionary. I'm a BIGGG Gorbachev fan.
Also, he wans't just responding to Reagan but he was The Guy ending the Cold War. US Presidents came and went but Gorb's visions and ideal to end the Cold War remained.

Furthermore, Gorbachev moved up ranks, was presented with big challenges (domestically and externally) but excelled to the best of his ability in dealing with these issues.

So, sure, what if he did collapse the Soviet Union? Nah, big deal. It was gonna collapse anyways. 

Anyway, PLEASE HELP ASAP.
Anyone who has finished this course and arrived safely...please.

Hey!
I don't do Gorbachev but i'd like to just say...
It's a "to what extent" question. So it's a judgement. You can freely argue against if you please. You need to look at everything you have on Gorbachev and figure out whether this statement is true in relation to him. Is it true? (And to what extent?) or isn't it? and then once you make this judgement you need to figure out WHY you believe this. Why you believe it wil be the basis of your argument.

Hope this helps! 

[LochNess Monster]

Hi Mada438

I think I'm just so stressed I don't know what points to make or where to begin writing. I know I can do it one of two ways...to a large extent or to a lesser extent. But I have so much information I just don't know where or how to get started.

[Mada438]

Hi Mada438

I think I'm just so stressed I don't know what points to make or where to begin writing. I know I can do it one of two ways...to a large extent or to a lesser extent. But I have so much information I just don't know where or how to get started.

If you have a large amount of information, then i'd recconmend before even looking at your info you should pick one: Either to a large extent or to a lesser extent. THEN look at your information and work out what information you'd use to argue that point. If you think "wait, maybe i don't think i can argue this well" Then pick another argument viewpoint!

[fantasticbeasts3]

PLEASE HELP!!! Kind of urgent.

So I have a Trials exam coming up.
This is a question they have given us beforehand for Personality Gorbachev: It is the way an individual faces challenges that shapes them and their achievements.” To what extent is this statement accurate in relation to the personality you have studied and their role in history?

I get Part a) but Part b) has me so confused. How do I even begin to write an essay on this??? (Trying to prep and cram before be like    ...)

-snip-

Hi! I studied Gorbachev last year. :-)

Mada438 has covered the basics of the question already. As this is a to what extent question, you can argue whatever the heck you want as long as you back it up with evidence and it makes sense.

In terms of relating the question to Gorbachev, it's asking you about Gorb's challenges and how it shaped what he did later. For this, you can look at his background and see how it shaped his political career - he agreed with communism, but he didn't like how it worked before. That's why his main aim was to introduce all these policies to make it a freer society, while sustaining the core bits of communism.

You need to mention his past as much as possible in the essay! His challenges as a kid (and his family too) shaped what he wanted to do later. This somewhat formed the basis of the policies he introduced as General Secretary. I don't think you need to mention the visionary/traitor debate for this question - at least this is how I interpreted the question - rather, you need to show how his past influenced his role as the GS, what he achieved in that role and how significant it was later.

Does this make sense lol I think I confused myself writing this

Hi Mada438

I think I'm just so stressed I don't know what points to make or where to begin writing. I know I can do it one of two ways...to a large extent or to a lesser extent. But I have so much information I just don't know where or how to get started.

Chill out, make a plan for what you think is relevant for this question and it'll fall into place.

Best of luck!

[LochNess Monster]

Hi! I studied Gorbachev last year. :-)

Mada438 has covered the basics of the question already. As this is a to what extent question, you can argue whatever the heck you want as long as you back it up with evidence and it makes sense.

In terms of relating the question to Gorbachev, it's asking you about Gorb's challenges and how it shaped what he did later. For this, you can look at his background and see how it shaped his political career - he agreed with communism, but he didn't like how it worked before. That's why his main aim was to introduce all these policies to make it a freer society, while sustaining the core bits of communism.

You need to mention his past as much as possible in the essay! His challenges as a kid (and his family too) shaped what he wanted to do later. This somewhat formed the basis of the policies he introduced as General Secretary. I don't think you need to mention the visionary/traitor debate for this question - at least this is how I interpreted the question - rather, you need to show how his past influenced his role as the GS, what he achieved in that role and how significant it was later.

Does this make sense lol I think I confused myself writing this

Chill out, make a plan for what you think is relevant for this question and it'll fall into place.

Best of luck!

Thank you so much fantasticbeasts and mada438!!!

I think I'm going to go with this intro and plan. What do you guys think???

The above statement is accurate in relation to Mikhail Gorbachev to a large extent. Gorbachev was an individual whose vision allowed him to face challenges and shape his achievements. From his new era of foreign policies for Russia, Gorbachev effectively set up a foundation for the end of the Cold War. Moreover, in dealing with a clash of personalities between himself and Reagan, Gorbachev’s clear attempts to appease the U.S was not merely a response but a striving to end the nature of the Cold War between the two superpower countries. As a visionary, his aim of ending the Cold War finally came about with the disarmament agreements. Overall, Mikhail Gorbachev’s vision allowed him to uncompromisingly face his challenges and shape his future achievements to come.

1.   Glasnost & perestroika + 5-point plan
2.   Star Wars (SDI)  appeasement
3.   Disarmament agreements (NPT, INF Treaty, etc.)

I sent this to my teacher and he said I was "on the right track." Whatever that means...

So, I have a feeling he wants us to talk about visionary/traitor ideas cause he said he would get "bored of reading too much part a)" stuff.
So is this ok? Will it make for a strong argument???

I'm kind of running out of time...so I'm writing it up and memorising it tomorrow. Or the day before. Ha ha ha.   

[theyam]

Hello

I was just wondering what the difference in response would be for these two questions:

1. To What Extent Was The Great Depression Responsible For The Collapse Of The Weimar Republic?
2. To What Extent Was The Great Depression contribute to the rise of the Nazi Party?

Thank you
from theyam

[fantasticbeasts3]

Hello

I was just wondering what the difference in response would be for these two questions:

1. To What Extent Was The Great Depression Responsible For The Collapse Of The Weimar Republic?
2. To What Extent Was The Great Depression contribute to the rise of the Nazi Party?

Thank you
from theyam

Hi!

The difference is the argument. Sure, you'd probably re-use a lot of the stuff you'd write, but the argument is different as you're arguing whether or not the GD had a big/small impact on the collapse of the WR or the rise of the Nazis. Like the GD was a factor in the collapse of the WR, and the rise of the Nazi Party would be one factor for the collapse of the WR.

I hope that makes sense ahaha

Best of luck!

[millie.w]

I have my Modern trials in two days and I haven't started studying at all, but there is sooooo much content!
Any tips on how to approach my study at this point in time?

[fantasticbeasts3]

I have my Modern trials in two days and I haven't started studying at all, but there is sooooo much content!
Any tips on how to approach my study at this point in time?

First - good luck!

At this point, I would be doing essay plans for as many questions as you can find. This way, you can cover a lot of the content and memorise details you'd like to include in your essays quickly! If you're writing notes, don't bother because we've got a ton in our notes section here.

Hope everything goes well!