Tips for Addressing the Prompts
Conditions:
Economic Conditions:
providing specific details of economic conditions is key. It is not enough to only say that conditions were poor, this is assumed. How were they poor? Which reforms were put in place and how did they change/continue previous conditions? Were they a success (define success)? Do they overlap with other conditions at play? Do economic conditions worsen due to an encroaching or already existing war? Do economic conditions exacerbate already existing social divisions based in race, ethnicity, etc.? More importantly – how are economic conditions the focal point for emergence of the state? Do the emerging powers focus on economic conditions via propaganda and persuasion in order to gain support for their newly rising state?
Weakness of Political System:
Failures of policies, etc. – it can always be claimed that the failures of policies to meet certain ends, the failures in wars, etc. can be viewed as indicative of a weak political figurehead, leadership, or decision making body. What evidence exists for this? (in the case of Russia-USSR, for example: Russo-Japanese War, WWI, reforms of Stolypin, etc.) How are these weaknesses manifested in other realms? Do they impact social divisions? Economic conditions? Successes/failures in war? How do people view the leadership or leading body? Is there trust in the system itself? If not, how does this factor play out as an underlying condition ripe for change? More importantly - how is a weak system exploited by those new powers that are beginning to emerge? Does this weakness make it easy for a transition to occur? Does this weakness led to reactionary policy and repression, requiring the use of force to overthrow the current system, or is this weakness so apparent that the transition is more democratic?
Impact of War:
Wars have long lasting impacts on societies, as do their treaties and the resulting loss of land, status, power, prestige, etc. Wars oftentimes aggravate other underlying conditions through forced conscription, levying of taxes, requisitioning of food, etc. How have losses in wars contributed to the sentiments of the people within a country? How have the wars magnified social division, economic conditions, or views that the political system is a weak body? More importantly - how have emerging powers used the events of the war to come to power? Do they focus on the losses of land and status? Do they use the war as an opportunity for exerting force of their own (revolution during wartime)?
Social Division:
Social divisions that existed were often pointed out through various impacts that were felt by policies or decisions in other areas of society. How did war impact the peasants in ways that were different from the aristocracy/middle class? How did land reform affect peasants vs aristocracy vs women, etc.? Were divisions based solely in class? Minority status? More importantly - how have emerging powers used the divisions within the country to gain power and status? Do they point out social division consistently in propaganda? Does the ideology address the grievances of those with lower status? Do they promise legal change to address grievances?
Methods Used to Emerge:
Persuasion and Coercion:
How are ideological components tied to the persuasive mechanisms (propaganda) at place in a society and how do these contribute to the rise of the authoritarian state? Were people easily persuaded? If so, why might this be the case? Were persuasive mechanisms pinpointing existing social division, economic conditions, etc. effectively? Were coercive measures effective at generating support or did they lead to greater levels of oppositions and uprising? What sorts of force were employed to coerce people into supporting (or being prevented from opposing) the emerging state?
Role of Leaders:
What role do these leaders play in creating revolutionary fervor? In providing an understanding of the role and nature of the state? In being a figurehead or idol of the underlying revolution? In applying force or coercion? In developing persuasive mechanisms? Was the leader one of importance during wartime? Was the leader a naturally charismatic individual who gained support through speech? Was the leader a major contributor to ideological change?
Ideology:
How might these ideas be used to coerce or persuade individuals to come over to your position? How might these ideas inform the mechanisms put into place for establishing the state’s apparatus? How might it adjust our understanding of the role of the state in creating progress? In putting down dissenting voices? In dealing with foreign powers? Were these ideologies built upon from previous worldviews (Marxism-Leninism, Mao Thought) or were they reactions to failings to address grievances (fascism)? What were the focal points of the ideology - social division, economic conditions, glorification of war/sacrifice, etc. - and how did these persuade people?
The Use of Force:
The use of force here must be contained within the emergence period. Civil Wars, Revolutions, street fighting, dissolution of parliamentary bodies (by force or threat of force), "marches on Rome/Munich," July Days... Be sure here to address the means of force - were these actions overly violent (killings, executions, military tactics and armaments) or destructive and intimidating (destruction of property)? Who were the targets of the violence? Were targets of force based in social divisions like religion/ethnicity, class, or political ideology?
Propaganda:
A question related to the use of propaganda in establishing the state will need to see students combine their understanding of the mechanisms/means of spreading propaganda (specific ways how propaganda was spread) as well as the messages that would have been present (what was being said)! How have the messages been formulated to hit on the underlying conditions that exist in the society? How have the messages been crafted to establish support for positions/ideologies of the emerging state? Did the means have greater importance than the message (e.g. did people like the content of Hitler's speeches or did the delivery charm the population and bring them to support the Nazis?).
Consolidation and Maintenance of Power:
Use of Legal Methods:
A question asking the importance of the use of legal methods to consolidating and maintaining power will hope that the student can address the legitimation process for a state. What role does law/constitution play in providing legitimacy to the state and its operations? Questions of this nature can also be used to address gaining support and backing from populations, as laws often attempt to redress grievances from a section of the population (land redistribution, guaranteed jobs, working benefits, etc.). Legal methods can also be used as a means to justify the use of force, as state power is the sole body recognized as having a legitimate need and power to use force.
Use of Force:
A question related to force should focus on the means of enforcing legal methods and can incorporate how opposition groups were treated within these methods, as there is significant overlap in some instances of force being used to suppress or eliminate opposition groups (as in the case of the Soviet Purges/Night of Long Knives). It is often important to focus on how force is a very volatile means of maintaining power, as well. Force mechanisms that are extensive and consistently employed will often result in backlash and a rise in opposition or challenges, which harm the ability to maintain power (or can harm legitimacy of a state).
Charismatic Leadership:
a question centered on charismatic leadership should be addressed by considering the role each person/leader played in the state. This question can also find overlap with the use of propaganda as a means of raising the status of the individual in the cases of manufactured charisma (Stalin). What was their charisma centered around (role in revolution/change/war? Ability to unite? Leadership? Theory?)? Did the charismatic leader actually unite the state? The people? Was the leader seen as responsible for progress? Decline? Answering each of these previous questions will allow one to address the role this played in maintaining power and does require some insight into responsibility for social, cultural, political, and economic policies.
Dissemination of Propaganda:
A question related to the use of propaganda as a mean of maintaining power should focus upon both the means- how messaging is distributed and the messages – what is being said. The focus can also include levels of censorship of information and how selective messaging, with repetitive and widespread means (various way of distributing information) reinforced the ideology, cult of leader, or need/support for legal/social/economic change and/or use of force. How did the messaging reinforce the ideology of the state and bring more people to support the party? What did messages that opposed official ideology look like and how was it treated? The propaganda of a state was also extensive and should be tied to domestic policies (economic, social, political, cultural) and tie together how every campaign, decree, law, etc. would have had an associated onslaught of propaganda associated with it - for posters what imagery was present for each campaign? what verbiage was used in literature pieces (newspaper, poetry, song, etc.)?
Nature, Extent, and Treatment of Opposition:
A question related to the nature, extent, and treatment of opposition will focus on all three of the topics – the nature of opposition – was this based in social division (ethnic, religious, class based division, previous enemies in war)? – the extent – how widespread was the opposition (certain regions? Throughout the whole of the state? Only in pockets? Urban? Rural?) – and how these groups were treated – were they allowed legal rights and protections via legal methods? Were rights eliminated (e.g. Nazi Nuremberg Laws)? Were they forced out of existence (Purges, gulags, anti-rightist campaigns?). More importantly – how does the treatment itself aid the state in maintaining power? Does granting equal status bring a stronger base of support to the state? Does eliminating the opposition group solidify legitimacy and control over new regions?
Successes and Failures of Foreign Policy:
A question related to foreign policies impact on maintenance of power must focus on key events in foreign policy (wars, treaties, expansion of territory, trade agreements, etc.). A solid way of addressing this kind of question would also be to focus on whether or not these foreign policy events were based in key promises and ideologies from the state (did they say they would expand and then successful expand? Did they say they would create new jobs and then successfully do so with a new trade agreement, thereby securing new markets for economic production?)? More importantly how did the events then led to greater support (successes) or questioning of whether or not the state was powerful enough/good enough/smart enough to continue leading (failure)?
Aims and Impacts of Domestic Policies:
Economic, Cultural, Social, Political Policies:
Questions asking about domestic policies will often be centered around verbiage like “to what extent were _____ policies successful.” It is imperative that you understand the aims of the policies and discuss their success/failure in this context. It is not historically accurate to measure success based upon current social, economic, political, or cultural phenomenon; rather, one must understand what the hope of the country was (aims) and if the policy met the or fell short of reaching the aims of country in which it was instituted. You are also able to use the aims to frame “success” in context – is progress a success? Does the full aim have to be reached in order for a policy to be deemed successful? (e.g. quotas set by CCP/USSR not being met could be seen as either unsuccessful in reaching aims or as successful progress towards reaching an end result (aim)). This section is the most daunting in terms of what to study, as the question will pick one of the four types of policies; if you're choosing legal methods or propaganda for maintenance methods, there will be significant overlap with this section as laws/decrees/campaigns were designed to instituted these policies and each policy would have propaganda that was created to introduce, explain, and generate support.
Impact of Policies on Women and Minorities:
Again, this is a bit daunting for a section. You must know the economic, social, political, and cultural policies. Question stems are often vague (impact of policies on minorities/women) allowing you to discuss which of the four types of policies you feel most comfortable with addressing, but it is still important and necessary that you’re capable of discussing specific policies (literacy campaign, new marriage laws, specific 5 year plans, etc.). Question stems have been two types in the past: compare and contrast impacts of policies on women or minorities (it has yet to be both…) or “policies rarely benefitted (or benefitted greatly) women or minorities (it has yet to be both).” Again, the question stems have been vague and will allow you to focus on policies you feel you know well. The vague question stems allow you to take a nuanced approach: for example: saying that economic policies DID benefit women in X country, but social/cultural/political policies did not would show a very deep understanding of the nuance of history; for example: compare/contrast impact – you can set the tone for impact – is impact based in change of status? How much of a change in status is impactful?
Authoritarian Control and Extent it was Achieved:
Questions of this nature are nearly verbatim the bullet point for the curriculum. To what extent was authoritarian control achieved in _____. This requires that you address the following characteristics of authoritarianism: role of ideology is weak; depoliticize and demobilize society producing a sense of political impotence; masses have some power, no complete control from regime; terror and propaganda used, but not as extensive as totalitarian regimes; small degrees of pluralism is allowed, political parties are ideologically very close.
Economic Conditions:
providing specific details of economic conditions is key. It is not enough to only say that conditions were poor, this is assumed. How were they poor? Which reforms were put in place and how did they change/continue previous conditions? Were they a success (define success)? Do they overlap with other conditions at play? Do economic conditions worsen due to an encroaching or already existing war? Do economic conditions exacerbate already existing social divisions based in race, ethnicity, etc.? More importantly – how are economic conditions the focal point for emergence of the state? Do the emerging powers focus on economic conditions via propaganda and persuasion in order to gain support for their newly rising state?
Weakness of Political System:
Failures of policies, etc. – it can always be claimed that the failures of policies to meet certain ends, the failures in wars, etc. can be viewed as indicative of a weak political figurehead, leadership, or decision making body. What evidence exists for this? (in the case of Russia-USSR, for example: Russo-Japanese War, WWI, reforms of Stolypin, etc.) How are these weaknesses manifested in other realms? Do they impact social divisions? Economic conditions? Successes/failures in war? How do people view the leadership or leading body? Is there trust in the system itself? If not, how does this factor play out as an underlying condition ripe for change? More importantly - how is a weak system exploited by those new powers that are beginning to emerge? Does this weakness make it easy for a transition to occur? Does this weakness led to reactionary policy and repression, requiring the use of force to overthrow the current system, or is this weakness so apparent that the transition is more democratic?
Impact of War:
Wars have long lasting impacts on societies, as do their treaties and the resulting loss of land, status, power, prestige, etc. Wars oftentimes aggravate other underlying conditions through forced conscription, levying of taxes, requisitioning of food, etc. How have losses in wars contributed to the sentiments of the people within a country? How have the wars magnified social division, economic conditions, or views that the political system is a weak body? More importantly - how have emerging powers used the events of the war to come to power? Do they focus on the losses of land and status? Do they use the war as an opportunity for exerting force of their own (revolution during wartime)?
Social Division:
Social divisions that existed were often pointed out through various impacts that were felt by policies or decisions in other areas of society. How did war impact the peasants in ways that were different from the aristocracy/middle class? How did land reform affect peasants vs aristocracy vs women, etc.? Were divisions based solely in class? Minority status? More importantly - how have emerging powers used the divisions within the country to gain power and status? Do they point out social division consistently in propaganda? Does the ideology address the grievances of those with lower status? Do they promise legal change to address grievances?
Methods Used to Emerge:
Persuasion and Coercion:
How are ideological components tied to the persuasive mechanisms (propaganda) at place in a society and how do these contribute to the rise of the authoritarian state? Were people easily persuaded? If so, why might this be the case? Were persuasive mechanisms pinpointing existing social division, economic conditions, etc. effectively? Were coercive measures effective at generating support or did they lead to greater levels of oppositions and uprising? What sorts of force were employed to coerce people into supporting (or being prevented from opposing) the emerging state?
Role of Leaders:
What role do these leaders play in creating revolutionary fervor? In providing an understanding of the role and nature of the state? In being a figurehead or idol of the underlying revolution? In applying force or coercion? In developing persuasive mechanisms? Was the leader one of importance during wartime? Was the leader a naturally charismatic individual who gained support through speech? Was the leader a major contributor to ideological change?
Ideology:
How might these ideas be used to coerce or persuade individuals to come over to your position? How might these ideas inform the mechanisms put into place for establishing the state’s apparatus? How might it adjust our understanding of the role of the state in creating progress? In putting down dissenting voices? In dealing with foreign powers? Were these ideologies built upon from previous worldviews (Marxism-Leninism, Mao Thought) or were they reactions to failings to address grievances (fascism)? What were the focal points of the ideology - social division, economic conditions, glorification of war/sacrifice, etc. - and how did these persuade people?
The Use of Force:
The use of force here must be contained within the emergence period. Civil Wars, Revolutions, street fighting, dissolution of parliamentary bodies (by force or threat of force), "marches on Rome/Munich," July Days... Be sure here to address the means of force - were these actions overly violent (killings, executions, military tactics and armaments) or destructive and intimidating (destruction of property)? Who were the targets of the violence? Were targets of force based in social divisions like religion/ethnicity, class, or political ideology?
Propaganda:
A question related to the use of propaganda in establishing the state will need to see students combine their understanding of the mechanisms/means of spreading propaganda (specific ways how propaganda was spread) as well as the messages that would have been present (what was being said)! How have the messages been formulated to hit on the underlying conditions that exist in the society? How have the messages been crafted to establish support for positions/ideologies of the emerging state? Did the means have greater importance than the message (e.g. did people like the content of Hitler's speeches or did the delivery charm the population and bring them to support the Nazis?).
Consolidation and Maintenance of Power:
Use of Legal Methods:
A question asking the importance of the use of legal methods to consolidating and maintaining power will hope that the student can address the legitimation process for a state. What role does law/constitution play in providing legitimacy to the state and its operations? Questions of this nature can also be used to address gaining support and backing from populations, as laws often attempt to redress grievances from a section of the population (land redistribution, guaranteed jobs, working benefits, etc.). Legal methods can also be used as a means to justify the use of force, as state power is the sole body recognized as having a legitimate need and power to use force.
Use of Force:
A question related to force should focus on the means of enforcing legal methods and can incorporate how opposition groups were treated within these methods, as there is significant overlap in some instances of force being used to suppress or eliminate opposition groups (as in the case of the Soviet Purges/Night of Long Knives). It is often important to focus on how force is a very volatile means of maintaining power, as well. Force mechanisms that are extensive and consistently employed will often result in backlash and a rise in opposition or challenges, which harm the ability to maintain power (or can harm legitimacy of a state).
Charismatic Leadership:
a question centered on charismatic leadership should be addressed by considering the role each person/leader played in the state. This question can also find overlap with the use of propaganda as a means of raising the status of the individual in the cases of manufactured charisma (Stalin). What was their charisma centered around (role in revolution/change/war? Ability to unite? Leadership? Theory?)? Did the charismatic leader actually unite the state? The people? Was the leader seen as responsible for progress? Decline? Answering each of these previous questions will allow one to address the role this played in maintaining power and does require some insight into responsibility for social, cultural, political, and economic policies.
Dissemination of Propaganda:
A question related to the use of propaganda as a mean of maintaining power should focus upon both the means- how messaging is distributed and the messages – what is being said. The focus can also include levels of censorship of information and how selective messaging, with repetitive and widespread means (various way of distributing information) reinforced the ideology, cult of leader, or need/support for legal/social/economic change and/or use of force. How did the messaging reinforce the ideology of the state and bring more people to support the party? What did messages that opposed official ideology look like and how was it treated? The propaganda of a state was also extensive and should be tied to domestic policies (economic, social, political, cultural) and tie together how every campaign, decree, law, etc. would have had an associated onslaught of propaganda associated with it - for posters what imagery was present for each campaign? what verbiage was used in literature pieces (newspaper, poetry, song, etc.)?
Nature, Extent, and Treatment of Opposition:
A question related to the nature, extent, and treatment of opposition will focus on all three of the topics – the nature of opposition – was this based in social division (ethnic, religious, class based division, previous enemies in war)? – the extent – how widespread was the opposition (certain regions? Throughout the whole of the state? Only in pockets? Urban? Rural?) – and how these groups were treated – were they allowed legal rights and protections via legal methods? Were rights eliminated (e.g. Nazi Nuremberg Laws)? Were they forced out of existence (Purges, gulags, anti-rightist campaigns?). More importantly – how does the treatment itself aid the state in maintaining power? Does granting equal status bring a stronger base of support to the state? Does eliminating the opposition group solidify legitimacy and control over new regions?
Successes and Failures of Foreign Policy:
A question related to foreign policies impact on maintenance of power must focus on key events in foreign policy (wars, treaties, expansion of territory, trade agreements, etc.). A solid way of addressing this kind of question would also be to focus on whether or not these foreign policy events were based in key promises and ideologies from the state (did they say they would expand and then successful expand? Did they say they would create new jobs and then successfully do so with a new trade agreement, thereby securing new markets for economic production?)? More importantly how did the events then led to greater support (successes) or questioning of whether or not the state was powerful enough/good enough/smart enough to continue leading (failure)?
Aims and Impacts of Domestic Policies:
Economic, Cultural, Social, Political Policies:
Questions asking about domestic policies will often be centered around verbiage like “to what extent were _____ policies successful.” It is imperative that you understand the aims of the policies and discuss their success/failure in this context. It is not historically accurate to measure success based upon current social, economic, political, or cultural phenomenon; rather, one must understand what the hope of the country was (aims) and if the policy met the or fell short of reaching the aims of country in which it was instituted. You are also able to use the aims to frame “success” in context – is progress a success? Does the full aim have to be reached in order for a policy to be deemed successful? (e.g. quotas set by CCP/USSR not being met could be seen as either unsuccessful in reaching aims or as successful progress towards reaching an end result (aim)). This section is the most daunting in terms of what to study, as the question will pick one of the four types of policies; if you're choosing legal methods or propaganda for maintenance methods, there will be significant overlap with this section as laws/decrees/campaigns were designed to instituted these policies and each policy would have propaganda that was created to introduce, explain, and generate support.
Impact of Policies on Women and Minorities:
Again, this is a bit daunting for a section. You must know the economic, social, political, and cultural policies. Question stems are often vague (impact of policies on minorities/women) allowing you to discuss which of the four types of policies you feel most comfortable with addressing, but it is still important and necessary that you’re capable of discussing specific policies (literacy campaign, new marriage laws, specific 5 year plans, etc.). Question stems have been two types in the past: compare and contrast impacts of policies on women or minorities (it has yet to be both…) or “policies rarely benefitted (or benefitted greatly) women or minorities (it has yet to be both).” Again, the question stems have been vague and will allow you to focus on policies you feel you know well. The vague question stems allow you to take a nuanced approach: for example: saying that economic policies DID benefit women in X country, but social/cultural/political policies did not would show a very deep understanding of the nuance of history; for example: compare/contrast impact – you can set the tone for impact – is impact based in change of status? How much of a change in status is impactful?
Authoritarian Control and Extent it was Achieved:
Questions of this nature are nearly verbatim the bullet point for the curriculum. To what extent was authoritarian control achieved in _____. This requires that you address the following characteristics of authoritarianism: role of ideology is weak; depoliticize and demobilize society producing a sense of political impotence; masses have some power, no complete control from regime; terror and propaganda used, but not as extensive as totalitarian regimes; small degrees of pluralism is allowed, political parties are ideologically very close.
How to attack Paper 2: Topic 10 and Topic 12
There are 12 topics, each with 2 questions from their prescribed content. This gives you 24 options to choose from.
You may not answer two questions from the same topic. e.g. You cannot answer the first question in the Cold War and the second question in the Cold War (questions 23 and 24).
This will lead to significant missing of marks on the overall score, as one of your essays will not be scored.
1. Nature of the questions:
Paper 2 and 3 questions will use command terms and require that you understand the question.
2. Plan your Essay
A. Linear
B. Mind Map
C. Matrix/Grid/Table
3. Essay Paragraph Structure
4. Avoid
5. Attack the prompt, if appropriate
You may not answer two questions from the same topic. e.g. You cannot answer the first question in the Cold War and the second question in the Cold War (questions 23 and 24).
This will lead to significant missing of marks on the overall score, as one of your essays will not be scored.
1. Nature of the questions:
Paper 2 and 3 questions will use command terms and require that you understand the question.
- E.g. analyze, evaluate, compare and contrast...
- E.g. Analyse the success of Stalin's domestic policies in the period 1928-1941.
- Not all questions have date ranges, but some might. Be sure to stay within the time frame.
2. Plan your Essay
A. Linear
B. Mind Map
C. Matrix/Grid/Table
3. Essay Paragraph Structure
- Begin with a thesis/topic sentence: Establishes the point or issue your paragraph is going to develop. Should be written in the form of a statement that is relevant to the overall question or topic being addressed.
- Elaborate/Develop: Explain in greater detail what is meant by the topic sentence.
- Evidence, examples, events. Statements and claims that you make must be supported by one or more of these.
- Balance: Offer an argument opposite to the one you are making to show you understand the issues from more than one angle, but make sure to counter-argue so that you have still made your point.
- Analysis: should be throughout the full structure of your paper. What does all of the information you are providing have to do with the question? What does it prove?
4. Avoid
- Personal pronouns
- Colloquial language/emotive language/overly subjective statements. e.g. Stalin was a really bad guy...
- Abbreviations of titles (SALT I is ok, KWII is not (Kaiser Wilhelm II)).
- Giving a one-sided interpretation of the question - you must consider multiple perspectives and have balance in your argument. This could be done through discussions of different schools of thought, historiography, or offering alternative views of events (causes, courses, and consequences).
5. Attack the prompt, if appropriate
- When addressing issues raised by the prompt, you do not always have to agree with the expressed intentions of the question.
- Example Question: Topic 10: "A successful foreign policy was essential for the maintenance of power by authoritarian leaders." With reference to one authoritarian leader, to what extent do you agree with this statement?
- This question allows a few ways to answer:
- Agree that foreign policy was essential for the maintenance of power for the leader.
- Discuss foreign policy but include other interpretations on why the authoritarian leader maintained power as equally as important (use of force, use of propaganda, use of laws, charismatic leadership, etc.)
- Discuss foreign policy and conclude that other reasons were more important in the maintenance of power (use of force, use of propaganda, use of laws, charismatic leadership, etc.)
- Memorize the various components of the prescribed content for each question - especially for Topic 10 - as understanding that there are a variety of factors that could explain events in authoritarian states will allow you to answer questions effectively and efficiently.