Since Trevor-Roper (1961) and Bullock (1998) (both cited in McDonough, 2002) assert in their analytical and exhaustive books that confronting Hitler earlier could have avoided war, the appeasement th...
... middle of paper ...
...reak of the second world war depends therefore on whether Hitler had the genuine intention to conquer the world (‘Hitlocentric interpretation’) or was simply a master of opportunism (‘Revisionist historians’). Whereas some argue that appeasement and the Munich agreement caused the outset of the war, ‘Revisionist historians’ assert that the radical change of policy which occurred after the invasion of Poland was a great opportunity that Hitler did not hesitate to seize. This evaluation is therefore more ideological than empirical since the lack of convincing evidence impede historians to reach a consensus. However, blaming Chamberlain for the beginning of the war is unreasonable since he did not have access to the information we have — interpretation of the pas could be influenced by the moral judgements some would have when examining Hitler’s actions (Taylor, 1963).
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- Throughout history, negotiation has been a powerful tool used by world leaders to avoid violence and solve conflict. When negotiation succeeds all parties can feel that that have achieved their goals and met their expectations, but when negotiations go awry countries and relationships can be damaged beyond repair. The Munich Agreement of 1938 is a primary example of this type of failure, which was one of the catalysts to the start World War II and Czechoslovakia’s loss of independence. The Czech people were greatly overlooked during this agreement process, which still in some instances affects the country today.... [tags: World History]
5818 words (16.6 pages)
- This essay analyses the responsibility of Neville Chamberlain and his highly controversial Appeasement theory which hypothetically prevented the outbreak of the Second World War. The policy of Appeasement epitomised by the Munich agreement, is a pact signed in 1938 between Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Italy, which allowed Hitler to annex Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland (area along Czech borders) to prevent the onset of a major war. Appeasement has been drastically criticised since it ended in a “humiliating failure” when Germany attacked Poland in 1939 (McDonough, 2002).... [tags: Analysis, Neville Chamberlain]
873 words (2.5 pages)
- Britain and France established the policy of appeasement in the 1930’s to reach an understanding to reserve peace by giving into the demands of Germany, led by Nazi Adolf Hitler. Many people shared Germany’s sorrow of the harsh conditions of the Treaty of Versailles and continued to allow Hitler to build up military forces and reconquer lost territory. Also, Britain and France were in no shape to even consider fighting against Germany after the economic crisis that followed through after World War I.... [tags: World History]
528 words (1.5 pages)
- Clement Attlee spoke first for the opposition, skewering the policy as an “unreal policy of unilateral appeasement…one cannot accept the word of either the ruler of Germany of the Ruler of Italy. In what must have been a line meant particularly for Neville Chamberlain, in the same speech he announced that, “in my view, the rape of Albania is to the Anglo-Italian agreement what the destruction of Czechoslovakia was to the Munich agreement.” Attlee and the Labour party viewed the invasion of Albania and Czechoslovakia as “the end of the attempt to make peace by disregarding moral issues.” Labour party rhetoric was as pointed as ever, attacking Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement and presenting... [tags: World War II, Neville Chamberlain, Italy]
1476 words (4.2 pages)
- The Policy of appeasement which Neville Chamberlain, prime minister of Britain from 1937-1939, stood by has been criticized by Churchill, prime minister of Britain 1040-1945, as we well as other historians. Appeasement refers to the act of complying to the demands of another in order to prevent war. Historians argue whether this policy was effective. There are two sides to the argument, while some historians argue that if Chamberlain had abandoned the appeasement policy and instead adopted a more aggressive policy towards Hitler’s moves the Second World War could have been averted.... [tags: army, Hitler, economic]
774 words (2.2 pages)
- The passive approach of the policy of appeasement was responsible for the severity of the World War. Hitler’s expansionist ideologies of lebensraum made war inevitable, however the appeasement was unnecessary since Germany did not have the military strength to oppose Britain and France. The appeasement policy allowed the formation of the ‘Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression’ Pact, which undermined Brittan and France’s reliance of Soviet intervention. The League of Nations was intended to resolve international disputes peacefully, however its concept of appeasement demonstrated its place as a ‘toothless tiger’ in events such as the invasion of Manchuria (1931.) The appeasement policy allowed for the t... [tags: World War II, League of Nations, Adolf Hitler]
1181 words (3.4 pages)
- Chamberlain's Policy of Appeasement In 1938 Neville Chamberlain came up with a policy that would hopefully prevent war. This policy was to give Germany what they wanted (to rearm, remilitarise the Rhineland and unite the Germans in Austria and the Sudetenland) in the hope that it would keep them satisfied and prevent war. There are several reasons why this was the correct policy to take. The first is that there was the memory of the Great War. People had the memories of the Great War and they never wanted anything like that to happen again.... [tags: Papers]
446 words (1.3 pages)
- Discuss the reasons why, in the period 1934-38, British critics of appeasement had such a limited impact on British policy towards Germany. The supporters of appeasement came from diverse groups, such as the Conservative Party, the Church of England and a number of right wing extreme elements. The only significant group on the centre left to support Chamberlain were pacifists. The very way in which such influential groups gave support to the policy, meant that it would be an even greater challenge for the opposition to discredit it Few Tories favoured direct military involvement in European problems.... [tags: World History]
1996 words (5.7 pages)
- Factors Which Lead to a Policy of Appeasement in Britain In the period 1931-38, there were several reasons that the policy of 'appeasement' was taken up by the British government. There were both long and short-term reasons that contributed. The most important, I believe was Britain's belief in Pacifism. The public could not support the war in terms of soldiers, and the government could not support a war financially. So it was in Britain's self interest to appease Hitler. Many of the British politicians feared another World War.... [tags: Papers]
1288 words (3.7 pages)
- British Policy of Appeasement at the Beginning of World War Two The First World War was the beginning of a new era in fighting. Weapons and fighting technique had drastically changed, making war much more dangerous. With the predictions for the new weapons including poisonous gas and bigger bombs, Great Britain was very much afraid for its citizens, especially men and women of fighting age. The country wished to avoid war at any cost. The choices of Neville Chamberlain and The Parliament favoring appeasement affected the decisions of other European leaders, such as French Premier Daladier, Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, and Winston Churchill, and those choices helped Britain enter the wa... [tags: WWII World War 2 Essays]
1309 words (3.7 pages)