Premium Essay

Appeasement and Public Opinion

In: Historical Events

Submitted By baileysmart98
Words 2167
Pages 9
To what extent was British public opinion the reason that Britain adopted the policy of appeasement?

After a defeat in WW1 Germany was left seriously impacted (want this to be changed?ritain adopted the policy of appeasement? reason thAT torians have argued that milirary am by-election showed the true anti-war). This gave Chancellor Adolf Hitler the perfect opportunity to expand Germany’s territories and get rid of the restrictions placed on Germany after the war. Therefore, Britain’s policy of appeasement aimed to please Germany in order to prevent further conflict, and after the horrific events of WW1 most of the British public supported this. With the horrors still fresh in the public’s mind it can be argued that British public opinion was the main reason as to why Britain adopted the policy of appeasement. However, there are other significant factors that contributed to the adoption of appeasement including economic difficulties, military weaknesses, threat of communism, lack of reliable allies, attitudes towards the Treaty of Versailles and concern for her empire.
One reason for the introduction of appeasement is public opinion. After the Rhineland crisis in a debate in the House of Commons in March 1936, Sir Winston Churchill warned that the atmosphere in Europe had changed recently to the extent that war was being regarded as a serious responsibility. He also described the German occupation of the Rhineland as a menace to Holland, Belgium and France. With the horrors of WW1 still fresh in their minds people were reluctant to enter a second world war and after Guernica in April 1937 support for non-intervention increased as it was feared that “the bomber will always get through”. Of the British public only a minority favoured a stronger line, and then only when British interests were threatened. Gustav Schmidt and Ronald Stromberg agreed that people did...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay


...APPEASEMENT OF GERMANY After seizing power in Germany, Hitler set in place an ambitious foreign policy that aimed to undo the effects of the Treaty of Versailles. Hitler wanted to: * re-take control of the territories that it had lost at Versailles, such as the Rhineland * re-arm its military forces - something forbidden by the Treaty of Versailles * expand its borders to provide Lebensraum (living space) for its population * unite all the German-speaking people of Europe under the control of Nazi Germany * Hitler was prepared to gamble that the other European powers would be reluctant to go to war to stop him. WHAT WAS APPEASEMENT After 10 million deaths in the First World War, many countries were determined to prevent any future conflict. In the 1920s the League of Nations tried to follow the idea of collective security: * the idea that countries acting together could discourage aggression and, if necessary, act together to stop aggressors. * This was not very successful as it proved hard for all the countries in the League of Nations to agree on a common policy. As a result a second idea was considered. Appeasement was a policy adopted by Britain during the 1930s. * This policy developed from the growing belief that some countries, especially Germany, had been unfairly treated in the peace settlement of 1918-1919. * When they began to demand aggressively that some terms in the Versailles treaty be...

Words: 1726 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Hitler and Stuff

...Hitler’s plans- Abolish the Treaty of Versailles – Hitler hated the Treaty and called people who signed it November Criminals., and was a living reminder of the losses in WWI; and that when Hitler came into power he would reverse ToV., and he stopped paying reparations. Expanding Territory- Hitler wanted to reclaim territory, and Anschluss with Austria., and German minorities to rejoin Germany, and give more lebensraum (living space.) Defeat Communism – A German empire carved out of Soviet Union would help Hitler to defeat communism, because Bolsheviks had brought the defeat of Germany in WWI, and believed they wanted control of Germany. Rearmament After coming into power in 1933, Hitler began to rearm, while thousands of unemployed joined the army reducing unemployment., a v large problem, and allowed him to deliver on his promise to make Germany great again, challenging ToV. He knew Gs supported rearmament, but others would not, so he rearmed secretly. He then chose to leave the league, following Japans example. 1935, Hitler formed a rally celebrating German armed forces, and in 36 reintroduced conscription, breaking the ToV and was getting away with it, in this point many other countries were using rearmament to fight unemployment. Failure of disarmament conference meant that other nations were not prepared to disarm. Hitler knew Britain had sympathy with Germany over armament, and the limits on Germany were too strict, and that Germany could be a good ally......

Words: 2127 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Explain Why Britain Did Not Intervene When Germany Re-Militarised the Rhineland in 1936 (12 Marks) European peace. We know this as Germany had a restricted amount of troops (100,000) and no air force under the Versailles treaty. This tells us Britain didn’t intervene when Germany remilitarised the Rhineland they were presumed not to be a threat. Another reason is that British Government agreed with Public opinion of that its German land so why can’t they occupy it. We know this was the case as a taxi driver once said to Chamberlain, that Germany was only marching into “their own backyard”. Considering the public opinion was for pacifism they would agree to do nothing and therefore the Government would follow suit to keep supports happy. My third reason for Baldwin not acting upon Germany was because he didn’t know that Hitler would have withdrew his troops if France or Britain had taken action upon Germany. We know this because many historians discovered that Hitler once told a group of guest whilst having dinner soon after the event. Although Hitler was renowned for over exaggerating or lying to make Germany sound greater or other countries weaker as historians also discovered. My final point is that Britain were already following an approach of appeasement towards Hitler’s Germany. This is to keep the peace and try and use him as a “strongman of Europe” to stop the development of communism throughout Europe. We know that Britain were already appeasing Hitler because they officially broke the Versailles treaty by signing the Anglo-German Naval agreement which......

Words: 386 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

The Sui, Sang, Tang Dynasties

...Jeff Woodard HS150D: World Civilizations Assignment 6_06 September 11th 2014 The Sui Dynasty, started from 581 and ended in 618, the Sui Dynasty lasted for only 38 years and had only three emperors. With a tyrannical second emperor - Emperor Yang, this dynasty was often compared to the Qin Dynasty (221 BC - 206 BC). However, the whole nation was reunified and certain economic and political advances were achieved in the period. At the end of the Northern and Southern Dynasties (386 - 589), the whole nation had undergone a long period of division. People who had endured sufferings of war were longing for the unification but neither the Northern Dynasties nor Southern Dynasties realized this goal. In Northern Zhou (557 - 581), Yang Jian, who was born to the noble class and was the Chengxiang (Prime Minister) of the last emperor, monopolized the political and military power and suppressed the separatist forces as well as some other royal forces. In 581, Yang Jian replaced Northern Zhou with Sui and proclaimed himself Emperor Wen. Thus Sui was founded, with Chang'an (currently Xian) the capital and Luoyang the auxiliary capital. In 589, the Sui Court defeated the last of the Southern Dynasties, Chen, and unified the whole nation. At reunification the society become more economically stable and thus societal functions became a more nature everyday thing. Ship building was incorporated in the skills industry and several other farming techniques were......

Words: 2110 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Did Johnson Get Sucked Into War Against His Will?

...Vietnam film. History by the defeated. America is still grappling with this film. Film was controversial when it came. Filtered through Reagan-ite, neo-conservative lens. 60s to blame for subsequent American problems. Central premise of the film – he does whatever he is told throughout the film, and reaps the awards at the end. Achieves the American Dream. He doesn’t ask questions. Undemocratic approach to the world. Robert McNamara, McGeorge Bundy * Bodies, asymmetric war. * War of attrition. * Vietnamese see this as a Civil War – but Americans see this as a Cold War conflict. * They are not fighting the war that they think they’re fighting. * Flexible response. * Dean Rusk, Secretary of State – anti-appeasement philosophy. Advocate of strategic bombing to weaken the enemy, but this does not work. Often ignored by Johnson, fairly marginal figure. * They see what they want to see. They have never been defeated – unthinkable that a third world country would bring America to its knees. Star Wars, Director: George Lucas * Original intention that this was supposed to be a comment on the Vietnam War. * The good guys in this film are the Vietnamese. But the bad guys, who are using lots of firepower, are the Americans....

Words: 814 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Compromising Toward Chaos

...Compromising toward Chaos: Failure to Lead results in Civil War David J. Chasmer Fairleigh Dickinson University Author Note David J. Chasmer holds a bachelor’s degree in Political Science from Rutgers University, and is a candidate for a master’s degree in Public Administration through Fairleigh Dickinson University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David Chasmer, 1310 Morris Street, Union City NJ 07087. Abstract This paper seeks to examine the presidency of Millard Fillmore, in the context of leadership. It is my objective to prove Fillmore to be a ‘bad leader.’ Fillmore’s actions and leadership skill will be analyzed against the five aspects of leadership, specifically shared vision, modeling the way, challenging the process, encouraging the heart, and enabling others to act. Compromising toward Chaos: Failure to Lead results in Civil War Highly divisive times in world history have provided the opportunities for some of our nation’s best leaders to take charge and guide our great nation on a path that leads to success. The particular brand of success sought after could be any, from security from attack, to economic success. The great leaders of history can be measured in any number of quantitative or qualitative standards, but the ultimate issue is whether their actions benefited the nation in the long run. With that being said, I believe that the opposite of a path toward success would be a path toward division and......

Words: 1658 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

To What Extent Do Pressure Groups Undermine Democracy influence legislation passed by government that takes their aims and objectives into consideration. It can be argued that Pressure groups are undemocratic due to the leaders and all members being unelected. However pressure groups have higher and ever increasing participation levels than political parties, meaning that membership to a pressure group may be the contemporary method of being involved in politics. It can be argued that Pressure Groups are a positive thing for democracy because of the extent to which they inform the public on important issues through their campaigning for members or signatures, having the public more informed and knowledgeable on issues such as climate change or immigration is beneficial due to the fact that they will understand parties policies better and be more confident in who they vote for. On the other hand Pressure Groups can be criticised due to them only informing the public of their biased, one-sided opinion which could be viewed as misinformation. Cause/promotional groups that are involved in issues such as climate change or wildlife preservation can be viewed as democratic because their objective aren’t solely for the benefit of its own members but also the wider community. Though this is democratic, some pressure groups such as financial groups would be better funded and have more ‘insider’ members. Insider member are those that have close ties to government through having members that are in parliament. This can be seen as......

Words: 864 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Why Did Labour Win the 1945 General Election?

...Instead of their conservative wartime leader, the british public voted for labour and its leader, Clement Attlee. Whilst both Churchill and Attlee were household names in the UK, Attlee was relatively unknown outside of the country, which is why the result of the election came as such a shock to many people around the world, who expected the british public to unanimously side with the man that had lead them to victory in the wartime period. The 1945 election was held on the July 5th with the election campaigns beginning in ernest a month prior. However due to many british servicemen stationed around the world still involved in the war against japan which would not be brought to a close until August 9th. This meant that the results of the election were not known until July 26th, when it was announced that labour had secured 47% of the votes, and 61% of the seats in the house of commons. Towards the end of the war in Europe, the Labour party withdrew from the wartime government in peroration for the forthcoming election to take place in July. Prior to the election, King George VI dissolved the parliament that had stood for 10 years without an election, to make way for the forthcoming july election, that would provide the country with a dedicated postwar government lead by a peacetime leader. Winston Churchill was said to be ‘both shocked and stunned’ by the defeat suffered by his conservative party, especially after opinion polls from earlier in the year cited him as......

Words: 1023 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Did the Conservatives Loose or Labour Win the 1945 General Election

...Did the Conservatives Loose or Labour Win the 1945 General Election? The 1945 election came quickly after the aftermath of World War Two and few knew how the election was going to turn out with party politics being pushed into the background during the six years of total war that Britain and her people experienced. This came to a surprise when Churchill’s war government was pushed out in favour of Labour instead and there is much debate surrounding this issue as to who lost and who won this election, or an evolution in voter attitudes? The most important factor in determining whether Labour won or the Conservatives lost was the change in voter attitudes that resulted from six years of total war. During the war, a definitive leftward shift had occurred in the electorate and this steady change can be seen through the work Labour had done in the War Coalition on the Home Front in extending state control where people now viewed Labour’s seemingly ‘radical’ policies as beneficial in helping those in poverty and need. This can be linked to the experiences of the middle classes during evacuation where the level of deprivation in urban areas was exposed and now it only can be seen as natural that the middle classes wanted these issues to be dealt with. As well as on the Home Front, the views of socialism had changed due to the help that Stalin’s Russia had in defeating the Germans and thus was seen in good light. So this trend to the left changed the attitude of many to Labour and......

Words: 1566 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay


...HISTORY IGCSE REVISION BOOK ARAB –ISRAELI What was Zionism * The longing for a homeland for the Jews. * It is the international political movement supporting the re-establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people.’ * ‘The historic homeland of the Jews was in the land of Israel.’ * ‘Since its establishment, Zionists continue to support it.’ * ‘It encourages the migration of Jews to Israel.’ * ’40% of Jews live in Israel and this % is rising.’ * ‘Zionism wants to strengthen and protect Jews and the State o What problems faced Palestine in 1945 Civil disruption.‘ * Large numbers of Jews wanted to go to Palestine.’ * ‘The US was supporting a state of Israel.’ * ‘Should immigration be allowed?’ * ‘Campaigns of violence by the Irgun.’ Why did Britain decide to hand Palestine over to the United Nations * ‘It did not want to stay.’ * ‘Because of the cost.’ * ‘There was violence.’ * ‘Because of its view of Zionism.’ * ‘The pressure from the Irgun.’ * ‘Because of the guerrilla campaign. Explains why * ‘At the end of the war Britain was under great pressure to change its policy and allow in survivors of the holocaust. They refused and this brought about violent protest.’ * ‘The Irgun deliberately attacked and killed British soldiers including the explosion at the King David Hotel. The violence from the Irgun was intended to......

Words: 87832 - Pages: 352

Premium Essay

Justification of Roman Aggression for the Glory of an Empire

...The Mind Behind the Machine: The Justification of Aggression for the Glory of an Empire The Roman Empire is one that has historically been shown in a positive light to the western world. We think this way despite the fact that we have a very limited knowledge of this empire that began to flourish over two-thousand years ago. What we do have are beautiful works of art and architecture that have stood the test of time, as well as books from famous writers such as Cicero and Plutarch who have told grand tales of Roman life and the powerful men who ruled and waged battles on a grand scale. Even with our vague knowledge of the Romans we still know leaps and bounds more about them than those who they conquered and due to their sheer power and our sense of wonderment learning more about their culture and the morals they tried to uphold, we find ourselves taking the Roman side since this is the one side of the story that most of us know. Roman conflict and the wars that they waged are explained in detail by historians and texts but interestingly enough, not much is given in the way of the thought process or motive behind the wars, nor about the people whom the Romans conquered. So what truly lay behind the Roman war machine then and how did they justify their actions as they fought with different people one after the other? Despite all the awe and wonder the Roman image seems to project in modern times, the way they......

Words: 2375 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

Iraq & Vietnam

...Vietnam wars that are similar in nature: our attempts at nation-building in a foreign culture, and our trying to sustaining domestic popular support in a long and drawn out war against insurgents. Policymakers should have an understanding of the reasons for U.S. political failure in South Vietnam, as well as for the Johnson and Nixon administrations’ failure to sustain popular support for the accomplishment of U.S. military objectives in Vietnam. A repeat of those failures in Iraq could have uncalculated consequences for U.S. foreign policy. Many people on the far left who have questioned the U.S. invasion of Iraq now doubt the chances of creating a stable democracy in that country and have pulled the Vietnam card as a comparison. In their opinions, the United States has again fallen into a foreign quagmire, a drawn out, abstract, indecisive political and military struggle which...

Words: 3524 - Pages: 15

Free Essay

Secularism in India

...I do not expect India of my dreams to develop one religion, i.e., to be wholly Hindu or wholly Christian or wholly Mussalman, but I want it to be wholly tolerant, with its religions working side by side with one another.'' So said Mahatma Gandhi. India has been declared a secular state by its written constitution and it is every Indians duty to stand by and believe in this declaration. And yet recent political and social events have questioned this declaration. Is India a secular country only on paper or does secularism actually exist in India; or is in the form of pseudo- secularism, a term the BJP and its allies seem to repeatedly harp on. During the freedom struggle, secularism was emerging as the most dominant principle. The leaders of the Indian National Congress; Gandhi, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Nehru and others were deeply committed to the ideal of secularism, though each expressed it in very different manners. Secularism became the mantra of the Indian nation, a nation exhausted by partition and sectarian riots and above all the assassination of Gandhiji, did not want any more divisive talk. The founding fathers represented the aspirations of the different sections of society and it is due to the struggles of these different people that secular principles got enshrined into the Indian constitution. Under Jawaharlal Nehru and later under his successors in the Congress Party, the concept of a secular nation-state was officially adopted as India's path to......

Words: 2171 - Pages: 9

Free Essay

Sharing Peace.

...Hinduism under Threat! Copy for General Distribution-Hitaya Hinduism under Threat! 1. Mass Conversions 2. Destruction of Hindu Institutions 3. Vote Bank Politics 4. Hindu Apathy and Ignorance 5. Solutions Copy for General Distribution-Hitaya Mass Conversions -15,018 persons converted in single day in Ongole -10,000 churches planned in 2005 alone, by just one group, the Seventh Day Adventists. Kyle Fiess, Maranatha (Org for building churches) marketing director reports: "We were astonished when Ron Watts (head of Seventh Day Adventists) presented us with a proposal for 10,000 churches in India…After many experiences like the one in Ongole, we no longer consider 10,000 churches to be an unrealistic goal, but an unparalleled opportunity”. article has links to may Copy for General Distribution-Hitaya missionary websites. Mass Conversions In 1998, the Seventh Adventist Church reported 225,000 members. In 2005, the numbers reached 825,000. “Most of the people in the villages are from a Hindu background, so it was gratifying to see so many people accepting Jesus," said Stenbakken (Seventh Day Adventist). This much conversion by just one organization. There are several other organizations working in parallel. Copy for General Distribution-Hitaya Mass Conversions Goal of 100 Million Hindu Converts Declared by Reverend Pat Robertson in Dallas Christian Conclave in Oct......

Words: 6737 - Pages: 27

Premium Essay

Western Ideals and World War Ii

...Western Ideals and World War II Jahaun Abrams HIS/114 March 26, 2011 Robert Brown Western ideals and World War II Hundreds of philosophers and historians possess the concern of how the modern world has come into being. Many issues, from The Great War to World War II have effects society today. This paper will trace the rise of totalitarianism in Germany as well as other European countries between 1918 and 1939, and the contrast to political developments in Great Britain, France, and the United States. In this paper the subject to explain is the Holocaust in the context of World War II and Western ideals, including the roots of anti-Semitism and intolerance of those considered inferior in Germany, a comparison of anti-Semitic actions in Germany, also an explanation of The Final Solution. This paper concludes with a description of the aftermath of World War II. After World War 1, the German government was facing thousands of difficult problems as society search for someone to blame for the defeat in the First World War. Extremists from all sides sent threats to revolts. The extreme inflation causes Thousands of Germans to have any faith in the German government. Hitler gains control of the Nazi party in the 1920s, an organization, which is anti-Semitic. Hitler gains popular political credibility by placing the responsibility on the Jews for Germany's defeat in the First World War. Hitler also blames Jews for Germany’s economic problems. “What is less......

Words: 2056 - Pages: 9