Friday, March 30, 2012

DBQ Appeasement - Path to WWII (DUE NOW)

Sorry about the format problems, especially the RUBRIC (this is the way the blog posted it)

NAME __________________________________________________________     Class ___________________     
DBQ
THE PATH TO WORLD WAR II
  
Directions:

1: Read the following documents and answer ALL questions following the documents completely.. Only the answers appearing immediately beneath the questions will count for score. Make sure you answer every question (completely) to the best of your ability. There is no reason to lose points on scaffolding questions.

2: Formulate a thesis statement that directly answers the question. Then write a well-organized essay that proves your thesis. The essay should be logically presented and should include information from at least 7 of the documents and your own outside knowledge of the topic.



Historical Context

Even though the 1920's began with a favorable outlook for peace, toward the end of the decade and throughout the 1930's the clouds of war were forming. Dictators arose in countries that were dissatisfied with the results of World War I. Actions were taken that moved Europe towards war. The debate over the events leading to World War II provides different perspectives.


Task

ü  Define appeasement.

ü  What were the arguments for and against appeasement of the Germans by the rest of Europe? 

ü  Based on the arguments and the results explain why appeasement was a good or bad policy.  

ü  Suggest 1 alternate approach the other European nations could have taken.


Document 1

In this excerpt from Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler explains some of his ideas.

One blood demands one Reich. Never will the German nation have the moral right to enter into colonial politics until, at least, it includes its own sons within a single state….Oppressed territories are led back to the bosom of a common Reich, not by flaming protests, but by a mighty sword.


What does Hitler suggest is needed for Germany? (1)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Document 2           

After Italy attacked Ethiopia, Haile Selassie, emperor of Ethiopia, asked the League of Nations for help in stopping the invasion. He asked for military sanctions but the League of Nations' response was ineffective. Haile Selassie used these words to the League of Nations:

'God and history will remember your judgment …. It is us today. It will be you tomorrow.

According to Haile Selassie, who should stop the aggressors? (1)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What will happen if the aggressors are not stopped? (1)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Document 3

Hitler promised to tear up the Versailles Treaty. Specifically, the treaty forbade German troops from entering the Rhineland, a buffer zone between Germany and France. The texts of two headlines and articles from The New York Times of March 8, 1936, explain this issue from the German and the French points of view.

HITLER SENDS GERMAN TROOPS INTO RHINELAND
Berlin, March 7--Germany today cast off the last shackles fastened upon her by the Treaty of Versailles when Adolf Hitler, as commander-in-chief of the Reich defense forces, sent his new battalions into the Rhineland's demilitarized zone. . . . "After three years of ceaseless battle." Hitler concluded, "I look upon this day as marking the close of the struggle for German equality status and with that re-won equality the path is now clear for Germany's return to European collective cooperation:'


PARIS APPEALS TO LEAGUE
Paris, March 7-France has laid Germany's latest treaty violation before the Council of the League of Nations. At the same time the French Government made it quite clear that there could be no negotiation with Germany ….
as long as a single German soldier remained in the Rhineland in contravention [violation] of Germany's signed undertakings [agreements] …. What is essential, in the French view, is that the German government must be compelled by diplomatic pressure first and by stronger pressure if need be, to withdraw from the Rhineland.

What action did Hitler take in defiance of the Versailles Treaty? How does he explain this? (2)

1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What was the reaction in France to Germany's actions? (1)
1 ____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


 Document 4

As German aggression continued in 1938, Britain, France, and Italy met with Hitler to discuss his demands for the Sudetenland, a section of Czechoslovakia.  This radio broadcast by William Shirer describes what happened at this meeting.
William Shirer: It took the Big Four just five hours and twenty -five minutes here in Munich today to dispel the clouds of war and come to an agreement over the partition of Czechoslovakia. There is to be no European war… the price of that peace is… the ceding by Czechoslovakia of the Sudeten territory to Herr Hitler's Germany.  The German Fuhrer gets what he wanted … His waiting ten short days has saved Europe from a world war … most of the peoples of Europe are happy that they won't have to go marching off to war … Probably only the Czechs… are not too happy. But there seems very little that they can do about it in face of all the might and power represented here.


What happened at the Munich Conference, according to Shirer? (1)
1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

What does Shirer feel will be Czechoslovakia's reaction? (1)
1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

How does Shirer feel the rest of Europe will react? (1)
1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Document 5

In this speech to Parliament, British Primer Minister Neville Chamberlain explains why he favored a policy of appeasement in dealing with Hitler at Munich in 1938:
With a little good will and determination, it is possible to remove grievances and clear away suspicion…  We must try to bring these four nations into friendly discussion. If they can settle their differences, we shall save the peace of Europe for a generation.
And, in The Times (London): I shall not give up the hope of a peaceful solution… We sympathize with a small nation faced by a big and powerful neighbor. But we cannot involve the whole British Empire in war simply on her account. If we have to fight, it must be on larger issues than that …. I am a man of peace … Yet if I were sure that any nation had made up its mind to dominate the world by fear of its force, I should feel that it must be resisted. . . . But war is a fearful thing.
Why does Chamberlain suggest appeasement? (1)
1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Under what conditions would Chamberlain fight? (1)
 1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Document 6

Winston Churchill disagreed with Chamberlain's policy of appeasement. In this speech to Parliament, Churchill warned England about following a policy of appeasement.
I have always held the view that keeping peace depends on holding back the aggressor. After Hitler's seizure of Austria in March, I appealed to the government. I asked that Britain, together with France and other powers, guarantee the security of Czechoslovakia. If that course had been followed, events would not have fallen into this disastrous state … in time, Czechoslovakia will be swallowed by the Nazi regime. … I think of all the opportunities to stop the growth of Nazi power which have been thrown away. The responsibility must rest with those who have control of our political affairs. They neither prevented Germany from rearming, nor did they rearm us in time. They weakened the League of Nations … Thus they left us in the hour of trial without a strong national defense or system of international security.


What strategy did Churchill suggest for keeping peace and stopping the growth of Nazi power? (1)

1 ________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

In Churchill's opinion, what opportunities had been lost in the quest for peace? (1)

1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Who is responsible for these lost opportunities? (1)
 1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________


Document 7

In this excerpt from Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin, George F. Kennan offers another critical view of the Munich Agreement (Boston: Atlantic Little Brown, 1961).
The Munich Agreement was a … desperate act of appeasement at the cost of the Czechoslovak state, performed by Chamberlain and French premier, Daladier, in the vain hope that it would satisfy Hitler's stormy ambition, and thus secure for Europe a peaceful future. We know today that is was unnecessary … because the Czech defenses were very strong … and because the German generals, conscious of Germany's relative weakness at that moment, were actually prepared to attempt to remove Hitler …had he continued to move toward war.


What are 2 reasons Kennan felt the Munich Agreement was unnecessary? (2)
1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
2 _______________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Document 8

In this excerpt adapted from British historian A. J. P. Taylor's The Origin of the Second World War (New York: Atheneum, 1965, p. 291), another point of view on appeasement is presented.

Can any sane man suppose … that other countries could have intervened by armed force in 1933 to overthrow Hitler when he had come to power by constitutional means and was apparently supported by a large majority of the German people. The Germans put Hitler in power; they were the only ones who could turn him out. Also the "appeasers" feared that the defeat of Germany would be followed by a Russian domination over much of Europe.


What were 2 reasons Taylor used to justify appeasement? (2)

1 _______________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
2 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Document 9

In this excerpt by Keith Eubank from Origins of World War II, the author argues that the discussion about stopping Hitler prior to 1939 was not an issue for several reasons.
… neither the people nor the government of [Britain and France] were conditioned to the idea of war. … Before September 1, 1939, Hitler had done nothing that any major power considered dangerous enough to warrant precipitating [starting] a major European war. Nor was there any existing coalition that could have opposed Hitler's massive forces. For Britain sought to appease Hitler [and] the French feared a repetition of the bloody sacrifices of 1914-1918. Stalin wanted an agreement with Hitler on partitioning Europe and the United States rejected all responsibility for Europe.


What were 2 reasons Eubank suggested that Hitler would not be stopped prior to 1939? (2)
1 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
  
2 ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

ESSAY

Historical Context

Even though the 1920's began with a favorable outlook for peace, towards the end of the decade and throughout the 1930's the clouds of war were forming. Dictators arose in countries that were dissatisfied with the results of World War I. Actions were taken that moved Europe towards war. The debate over the events leading to World War II provides different perspectives.


Task –Use at Least 7 documents to complete each part of the task (quote and give credit to authors you summarize)

ü  Define appeasement.

ü  What were the arguments for and against appeasement of the Germans by the rest of Europe? 

ü  Based on the arguments and the results explain why appeasement was a good or bad policy.  

ü  Suggest 1 alternate approach the other European nations could have taken.



Directions
Write a well-developed essay that addresses all parts of the task listed below. Your essay should have (at least) an introduction with a clear thesis, 3 body paragraphs that address the tasks and prove your thesis, and a conclusion. It should incorporate at least 7 documents and some outside knowledge.


Read carefully before you write!!
-- Have you examined every document to see if it has extra information to help you complete the task and support your thesis statement?  (you must do more than simply answer the question below the document)

-- Does every paragraph have a topic sentence that clearly connects to the thesis and tasks? 

-- Have you given credit to each author/document you have used (for example --- in Keith Eubank Origins of World War II he argues that Hitler…)

-- Do you have a good hook and a strong conclusion?  There are some great quotes in the documents that would work.  Make sure you explain your quotes and connect them to the historical context/thesis!

-- Your hook and thesis should be connected by an historical context (do not simply restate the one given to you)  Use all the information and the historical context provided to create something unique!

-- Have you proof read your essay out loud to a friend and an adult?  Have you allowed others to read and critique your work?  Have you left the essay alone for a day and then read it again and made corrections?

-- Have you read the Rubric for getting a 5?  Have you read Improvements Needed section and fixed all your problems before you handed in your essay?

-- Does each paragraph contain a minimum of at least 5 sentences?   A decent paragraph may require 10 or more! 

-- Do you explain why this topic is so important in history and how it applies to today?





Rubric Essay 







ESSAY
5
·       Contains an introduction, body, conclusion in correct order.
·       Introduction contains provable thesis and interesting hook.
·       Proves thesis by including supportive details.  Ideas are fully developed in body.  
·       Shows clear evidence of frequent primary source document use (i.e. quotes, statistics)
·       Is both descriptive and analytical (applies, compares/contrasts, analyzes, evaluates)
·       Includes relevant outside information
·       Reader understands why topic was important in shaping world history.
·       Writing conventions contain little or no mistakes.
·       Evidence of revision.
4
·       Introduction contains thesis and hook.
·       Body has several proofs that are related to the thesis.
·       Shows evidence of primary some source document use (i.e. quotes)
·       Essay may be slightly off-topic at times.
·       Minimal inaccuracies
·       Reader shows some good understandings of important facts related to topic
·       Some mistakes in spelling and grammar.
·       Clearly demonstrates similarities and differences
3
·       Thesis is stated in first part of essay.
·       Writing is a summary and makes some attempt to prove a thesis.
·       Many ideas are weak and not fully developed.
·       A few uses of primary sources
·       May lack focus; may contain digressions; some inaccuracies
·       Mistakes in spelling and grammar.
·       Attempts to demonstrate several similarities and differences
2
·       Thesis is weak or unclear.
·       Writing is a summary and does not show a purpose.  May be missing paragraphs introduction or conclusion.
·       Ideas are weak and not always related to the topic 
·       Several inaccuracies.
·       Shows little evidence of primary source document use
·       Many mistakes in spelling and grammar that make it hard to read.
1

·       No Thesis
·       Lacks parts of essay like body or conclusion
·       No paragraphs
·       Few proofs and no use of sources
·       Many mistakes in spelling and grammar that make it hard to read


Improvements needed because of the following:






- Parts not written in your own words

- not giving credit to your source

- Sentence structure weak or confusing

- Run- on sentences

- Needs more quotes, statistics, sources

- Unclear Thesis

- Does not clearly prove thesis

- Does not use topic sentences

- Paragraphs off topic

- Does not give specific examples

- Not enough proof/body paragraphs (less than 3)

- Does not complete task requirements

- No hook

- Hook not clearly connected to topic

- Weak historical context

- Does not follow a logical or chronological  pattern

- Incomplete or weak  conclusion


-  Poor spelling

-   Reader has difficulty  understanding how the person or topic was important in shaping world history

- no/few quotes from primary sources

-  turned in late




Essay Grade



    /5
_____________
Final



No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.