Essay Question Homework 23 Oct 2014

"The defeat of Nazi Germany was solely because of the US entry into World War II." How far would you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [12]

Invasion of Soviet Union

Allied Resistance - Battle of Britain

Defeat of Nazi Germany - Cash And Carry Plan - 1939

Japan's entry into war - the Japanese army and navy

Defeat of Nazi Germany - Lend-Lease Act 1941

KJQ essay

Name: KJQ   

I agree to a large extent that Japan started World War ll in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition rather than about survival. This is because Japan had been practising an expansionist policy, Japan chose to escalate tensions and did not avoid starting world war II and Japan had a government that was planning for a major war and this is why I say that Japan starting WWII was more ambition than survival.

I say so because Japan already had shown that they wanted to conquer other countries since 1902 (Why not just state this is an “expansionist policy” of Japan????)  when they had a treaty with the Britain to agree on the Anglo-Japanese alliance. This means that Japan will recognize British’s rule in India while Britain would recognize Japanese’s rule in Korea. Japan also had the Greater East-Asia co-prosperity Sphere propaganda campaign to stir up feeling of Asian nationalism and against Western colonial powers. This shows that Japan had long-term expansionist plans (Put this at the START of the paragraph à This is the POINT. Always put the POINT at the START of the paragraph)  and it is also a continuation of their expansionist plans to attack the Pearl Habour and South-East Asia. Also, Japan made the 'Reject the Anglo-American centred peace' speech at the Paris Peace conference. The speech contained a warning that unless the Western powers give Japan access to the Asian colonies under United States and Britain to sell Japanese goods and buy raw materials, Japan may turn aggressive.(So what?)  Japan also demanded that its citizens be allowed to purchase lands and set up businesses in US and Britain as their colonies, and also wanted better treatment of their citizens that went over to other countries. This shows that Japan is indirectly telling the other countries to open their markets to Japan, if not, they will start a war.

[NEW Paragraph because this is a NEW POINT – 1 point 1 paragraph]

Furthermore, Japan could also have chosen to de-escalate tensions with the United States(U.S) by withdrawing troops from China and normalise with U.S when the U.S cancelled the 1911 commercial treaty as a response to the invasion of China. However, Japan further expanded became even more aggressive by invading Vietnam causing U.S to enforce the trade embargo to corner force Japan to retreat from Vietnam, yet they Japan chose to attack the Pearl Harbour instead of trying to reduce tensions with the U.S. Japan did this because they had planned to conquer South-East Asia and the United States was in their way and attack Pearl Harbour was part and parcel of their expansionism and had little to do with Japan’s survival. Therefore, I agree to a large extent that Japan started World War II in Asia-Pacific was more about ambition rather than about survival.

However, Japan also started World War II in the Asia-Pacific for the survival of their country. Japan was economically vulnerable and this vulnerability could only be permenantly overcome if Japan had captive markets for its goods via a large set of colonies where it could exploit and obtain a permenant and guaranteed source of cheap land, labour, resources and food without depending too much on free trade. I say so because the geography of Japan is quite mountainous, and therefore they have very less area for agriculture and place for the blooming population to stay in. Also, the 1929 Great Depression taught Japan an important lesson that free trade is not a reliable way to guarantee economic prosperity as trade partners like U.S and Europe became protectionists to protect their own countries’ economic survival by not trading with Japan. This shows that Japan needed more land area for agriculture to feed the increasing population and the only way to guarantee supply of food, land and resources is to expand into other territories, therefore there is a need for them to take over other countries, for survival. Hence, I also agree to a small extent that Japan started World War ll in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition than survival. Japan did require to wage world war II because of survival.

In conclusion, I think that Japan started World War II in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition rather than about survival as Japan does not need to conquer other countries as they already had Taiwan and Korea under their control and there was enough resources in the two country to ensure the survival of Japan. Also, they are not under any external threats from other countries, so there was no need to act aggressively as Japan was not under threat from any state.  is no need to expand their territory for survival. Hence, I agree to a large extent that Japan started World War II was more about ambition than survival.

Comments   
1. Place the points straight after the Thesis statement.

2. Place each point at the start of the paragraph, then elaborate and explain examples.

3. You should mention that Japan owned Korea, Taiwan AND Manchuria by 1941 and Manchuria was rich in resources like coal and iron. Although Japan needed oil which Manchuria did not have, it did not really need to attack South-East Asia because it could have survived by trading and by normalising its relations with the United States rather than making it worse by acting in an expansionist manner. 

LJP Essay

2. Japan started World War 2 in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition than survival. How far would you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.

  I agree to a large extend that Japan started World War 2 in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition than survival. This is because Japan chose to wage war when it could have chosen peace, Japan also had an expansionist policy all this while and Japan was also led by a military government bent on dominating Asia.

  Japan started World War 2 in the Asia-Pacific as they were ambitious. Japan practised an expansionist policy and continued the policy from 1895 all through to the eve of Dec 1941 when it waged World War II in the Asia Pacific. The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere was one example of their expansionist policy. The Japanese promised an Asia dominated by Asians with Japanese as the dominant race while the other Asian nations would be loyal to the Japanese. This is clear evidence of a planned intention to enter war eventually with the Western powers by instigating rebellion among the local population against their Western colonial masters. By the Japanese promise to liberate the local Asians in the South-East Asia from their colonial masters , it is obvious that the Japanese were not forced to enter the war in World War 2 in Asia but rather it was designed to be way. creating a situation whereby it could extend its empire and conduct an expansionist policy. Korea and Taiwan were already Japanese territories by 1895 but Japan still invaded Manchuria in 1931 and later, China in 1937. Hence, Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbour and invasion of South-East Asia on 7 Dec 1941 was simply a continuation of this policy of aggression and expansion and thus Japan started World War 2 as they were ambitious and not because it needed to survive.[Link back to question!]

  In addition, Japan could have chosen to de-escalate tension with USA and avoided starting World War II in the Asia Pacific. When US cancelled the 1911 commercial treaty reducing Japanese trade upon Japan’s  invasion of China, Japan could have withdrawn from China to reduce tension and try to normalise ties with the US. Not only did they not do so, they expanded further and invaded Vietnam. This caused the US to enforce trade embargo on Japan. Japan felt cornered but it all started with their own wrong doing. Japan could have still reduced tensions but they chose to attack Pearl Harbour instead. Hence, Japan could have chosen to de-escalate tension with USA but because they did not, we are clear that Japan was doing so because it wished to fulfil its expansionist ambitions and NOT because it had to survive. [Link back to question!]

  Finally, Japanese military influence of the government was considerable great and the Japanese military was pro-expansionist. An example was the assassination of the Prime Minister then, Konoe Inukia in 1932, who opposed the Manchurian invasion. The murder of Prime Minister, Konoe Inukia shows extensive influence of pro-expansionist military in Japan. The Japanese also did not believe in backing down when threatened with war, due to the Samurai spirit placed loyal, duty and country before self. Hence the way the Japanese conducted its relations  with the other nations was very aggressive particularly in the 1930s because of the growing military influence. Hence, we can say that Japan started World War 2 in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition than survival as it was led by an ambitious military government that believed in practising expansionism and had a society that supported it. .

  However, Japan did not start the war fully due to ambition.

  Japan started World War 2 in the Asia-Pacific for survival. Japan was inherently, economically vulnerable and lack of farming land causing insufficient food for the Japanese. There was also lack of land for housing due to mountainous nature of geography in Japan.[SO???] The Great Depression in 1929 also taught the Japanese an important lesson – free trade was no a dependable way to ensure economic prosperity. During the Great depression, US blocked Japanese goods due to protectionism and did not lift the import tax. Japanese companies could not sell their goods cheaply or at all in the US market as a result. Japanese companies were badly affected as large US export market was not accessible. Japan could not earn the foreign currency to import goods they needed, and so, unemployment increased and poverty rose. Japan had to search for new markets like China, Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan which all seemed like good markets to buy Japanese goods. The Great Depression was a reminder of how vulnerable the Japanese were in terms of depending on trade with Europe and America. Hence, the Japanese learnt that they could not depend on free trade alone to survive and needed markets that would always be open to buy Japanese goods when the American and European markets were hit by recession and became protectionist. They realised the need to expand their empire to secure permanently open markets and therefore conquering territories, such as conquering South-East Asia in December which was something they had to do for their survival in long term. Hence, Japan started the war due to survival not ambition.

  In conclusion, Japan started World War 2 in the Asia-Pacific due to ambition rather than survival as there was not a need to conquer territories for survival. trade. They  Japan still could have traded with other counties without having to conquer them. Furthermore, by 1941, Japan was already in possession with Korea, Taiwan, Manchuria and large areas of China. Hence, while Japan is not fully economically sufficient, they already had considerable resources at their disposal. It was not necessary to invade other countries. By escalating the tension with USA and instigating rebellion, Japan was clearly planning to expand its empire and was just using permanent trade as an excuse.(Last paragraph was decent)

Comments

1. Start each paragraph correctly – State first, second, third or next or furthermore, in addition, also……use such connectors to show continuation of a line of argument.

2. Always link the start and end of each paragraph back to the question! 

Essay homework for 3G

Question: Japan starting World War II in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition than survival. How far would you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [12]

Instructions
1. Post your answers in the comments box and leave your name.

2. Also, print a copy of your work out and bring to class for discussion.

Essay homework for 3H

Question: Japan starting World War II in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition than survival. How far would you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [12]

Instructions
1. Post your answers in the comments box and leave your name.

2. Also, print a copy of your work out and bring to class for discussion.

Essay homework for 3D

Question: Japan starting World War II in the Asia-Pacific was more about ambition than survival. How far would you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [12]

Instructions
1. Post your answers in the comments box and leave your name.

2. Also, print a copy of your work out and bring to class for discussion.

Good website for summary of Stalin's Soviet Union

http://www.johndclare.net/Russ12.htm

Feedback on SEQ - Stalin's Rise to Power

Utility Exercise on Stalin

Question: Page 58 How far is source 2.14 useful as evidence that the youth in the Soviet Union
were satisfied with being under Stalin’s rule? Explain your answer.

Answer using provenance – 1m e.g. Yes, the source is useful as evidence because it is written
by a young pioneer.

Answer by making an inference/or quoting evidence from source as to whether the
source can provide evidence to help us understand the issue better. (2-3m)

Answer by saying whether the information is complete(Missing information) about helping us understand that the youth in the Soviet Union were satisfied with being under Stalin’s rule. (Cross-reference with your own knowledge of the topic or other sources) 4-5m

Answer by cross-referencing with other sources given OR background information/knowledge as to whether the information in the source is accurate/reliable  4-5m

Answer using questioning bias by looking at provenance. (CAMEDO-BHW) 6m 
( But the source can be biased or neutral)

Chpater 2 - What was the main reason for Stalin's rise to power?

Activity 4
What were the key reasons for Stalin’s rise to power?

“Stalin’s rise to power was because he was a skilful politician.” How far would you agree? Explain your answer.

Read pages 37 to 43 to study the reasons for Stalin’s rise to power.

Categorize the information’s key points into the different reasons and further group these facts into 

a) Stalin as a skilled politician
b) The weaknesses of his political opponents
c) Circumstances in Stalin’s favour.

So which was the key reason for Stalin’s rise to power? 

Chapter 2 Lenin decides who will succeed him....

Imagine you are Vladimir Lenin and you are choosing your future successor for leadership of the Soviet Bolshevik (Communist) Party.

 You have 6 potential candidates and you have compiled write-ups of them as stated in the textbook page 39 and 40. You can only choose 1 successor and you know that the future of your beloved Russia depends completely on making the right choice.

Given the history and social, economic and political situation in Russia at that time, write a note that will be read to the Central Executive Committee (See page 34) of the Communist Party upon your “cluck!” aka death, explaining the reasons for your choice.
Make the right choice……

Stalin's rise to power - Chapter 2

Consolidation of power

Consolidationofpower from The Grange School & Sports College

Rise of Hitler - Compare and Contrast

Sources

Possible response

Q. Study Source C and D. How similar are sources C and D? Explain your answer.
Similar in message/content	Both Sources C and D are similar in telling us/saying that Hitler came to power with the support of the German people[3m]…… [Basis of comparison/Common Criterion]…… Source C states that the German people willingly supported Hitler… [Inference Source C]….I say so because in Source C it says that “they(Germans) voted for him(Hitler)…[Evidence Source C]…. This means that the German people gave him their support in democratic elections and were not forced to support him…..[Explanation of Source C] Similarly, Source D states that the rich and influential  Germans cooperated with Hitler……[Inference source D] I say so because Source D states that “the elite of German society worked with him”…..[Evidence source D]This means that even the rich in society who could have easily not bothered about Hitler were willingly giving him their support which means that Hitler came to power through support from the German people…[Explanation source D] Hence source C and D are similar in the view that Hitler came to power with the support of the German people ……[ Basis of comparison] – 4m
Difference in message/content	Source C and D differ in telling us/saying whether Hitler came to power through his own ability/strengths…… [ Basis of comparison] Source C states that Hitler had great intelligence and good speaking skills as his strengths that helped him become the leader of Germany…[Inference Source C]….I say so because in Source C it says that “Hitler used his strong….oratory skills” and he “skilfully and convincingly told the Germans what they wanted to hear”. [Evidence Source C] This means that….Hitler had the ability to influence people effectively through his speaking and he was smart enough to know how to say it in a way that appealed to the German which allowed him to rise to power.[Explanation of Source C] On the other hand, Source D states that Hitler came to power because most Germans did not stop Hitler from gaining power and not through his own strengths… [Inference from Source D]….I say so because in Source D it says that “ most Germans at least tolerated his rise” …… [Evidence from Source D]…..This means that… the German people did not do anything to prevent Hitler form seizing power and in fact gave him the opportunity to become Chancellor simply by not stopping him. [Explanation from Source D] Hence, source C and D differ in the view on whether Hitler came to power through his own ability or because the Germans allowed him to do so……[ Basis of comparison]
Similarity in Purpose	Source C and D are similar in purpose. Source C’s purpose is to influence/ Convince (Action word)  the modern Germans…..[audience-who?]…. to know that Hitler came to power through his ability to convince Germans using a series of half-truths and lies……[Message]……..so that the German people today [audience-who?] will be more aware of how Hilter came to power and not allow themselves to be fooled like their ancestors were and to “vote” another dictator to power……[ Outcome = behavior/action of the audience after seeing the source message] Likewise/similarly source D’s purpose is to influence/ Convince (or other Action word)  Germans today.[audience-who?]…. to realise that Hilter rose to power because the Germans in the 1930s allowed him to do so……[Message]……..so that the Modern day Germans [audience-who?] will be more careful in selecting who is their leader……[ Outcome = behavior/action of the audience after seeing the source message] Hence, the purpose of Source A and B are similar.

Answer to the compare and contrast question from the following

Study Sources 2 and 3.
How different are Sources 2 and 3? Explain your answer.

Possible response 

Sources 2 and 3 are different in telling us whether Hitler’s support was forced out of people or was his support willingly provided. Source 2 tells us that Hitler’s support was forced out of people as Source 2 states that a German Communist unwillingly made the Hitler Salute when he was forced to do so by several Brown Shirts. On the other hand, Source 3 states that “Most people” wore edelweiss emblem which showed that they had contributed to the Hitler birthday fund. This means that many people had contributed to his fund which indicates that people willingly gave him support. 

Sources 2 and 3 are similar in telling us that the public display of affection and support for Hitler was carried out in a grand fashion.  Source 2 states that Nazi nurses were carrying banners in public support of Hitler. Likewise, Source 3 states that Hitler’s birthday was celebrated with great pomp and pageantry with Birthday cakes with Hitler’s face on it and his posters pasted all over the town. This means that German’s displayed their affections for Hitler in a very grand and public fashion.  

What is Mr Lim's Social Studies blog address?

Here it is:

www.socialstudiessingapore.blogspot.sg

The story of Adolf Hitler

Understanding Hitler and the Third Reich

The Treaty of Versailles

Comments on 3D SBQ Practice Time Homework

Practice Time from your Textbook. 

Q1. What does this source tell you about the political situation in Germany? Explain your answer.

Key areas of improvement. 
1. We did a brief discussion in class, so most of you realised that we needed to find an Adjective to describe the political situation and so the common answers were "unstable"; "disorganized"; "confusing".

2. However, a small number of you answered that "The German people were unhappy." This is a 0 mark answer.

Why? The reason is that you are NOT answering the question. The question is asking about the political situation which refers to the constant changing of government due to the proportionate representation and coalition nature of the Weimar Government and that people were feeling insecure because the government was unable to function as it kept changing. So if you told me the people were unhappy, you may be correct, but that is NOT what the question is asking you.

3. Some of you over-quoted evidence. A handful quoted the entire source or a large chunk of it. There is no need. Focus on the bits that show a "disorganized" and "confusing" or "unstable" political state of affairs and you may even paraphrase the evidence.

4. Do complete your answer by linking back to the question. e.g.
"Hence, we can say that the political situation was unstable as there was a constant change of government and this made people feel insecure." 

Compare and contrast.
Q2. Ho similar are these sources? Explain your answer. 
Key areas of improvement. 
1. Use connectors "Likewise" or Similarly" for similarity and "On the other hand" or "However" when showing difference. Its in your NOTES on SBQ!

Chapter 3 - The rise of Adolf Hitler

Watch this video carefully to under how Hitler came to power. Take down the key points.

Was his rise more due to his own capabilities or because he was an opportunist who took advantage of the political and economic circumstances of Germany at that time?