Top-Rated Free Essay

was appeasement right or wrong

Powerful Essays
Seungyun Baek

History 10A

Appeasement - Right or Wrong?

Hypothesis #1. After reading documents A and B, create a hypothesis regarding the questions: Was appeasement the right policy for England in 1938? Cite evidence from the document to support your answer. (Yes)
Appeasement was the right policy for England in 1938. This is because It was based on the idea that what Hitler wanted was reasonable and, when his reasonable demands had been satisfied, he would stop. Appeasement was the only practical action that could be held during that time. England and France were not ready to get into another war. They already had severe damages that they couldn’t afford to get into another war. This gave them time to prepare for war since it is inevitable anyways. It also gave them time to prepare for old and broken equipment. Alliances needed to be made and through this, that was all possible. Also, through this policy, they were able to get public support. Appeasement also allowed Britain time to retool factories for war. Many Britons during that time saw Hitler as a defence against Russian Communism. This all happened because they thought that Hitler would soon be satisfied after remilitarizing the Rhineland, annexation of Austria and czechoslovakia. Wanted to please Hitler this way. The empire was already overstretched and its financial resources quite limited. The U.S. was isolationist. Soviet communism was feared, France was weak. This was all done to prevent war and preventing war is something needed to be done. Their objective was for the collaboration of all nations in building up a lasting peace for Europe. The Czechs, left themselves and told they were going to get no help from the Western Powers, would have been able to make better terms than they have got. This also gave the greatest chance of securing protection for the country. Czechoslovak State would’ve not been able to be an independent entity without this. Chamberlain remembered the slaughter of the First World War and all the damages it cause. He thought that having another war would destroy civilisation and thus came up with the appeasement. Because of the appeasement, the war morale of the British people, who knew they had done everything possible to avoid war was improved. They felt like the already did everything they could to stop this and so their morale was developed. This also gave Chamberlain that he couldn’t trust Hitler. Appeasement rested upon both a traditional perspective on foreign interests and a rational assessment of military means and political will. Appeasement gave time for everyone and it started as an idea for peace and not war and violence and to keep from good men dying for no reason. Appeasement was just trying to give Germany justice. Appeasement was moral cowardice which meant that it was a necessary consequence of discarding morality as inconsequential. Appeasement was a reversion to and an extension of traditional British foreign policy and diplomacy. So in conclusion, appeasement was something worth trying and something that was good to have been accomplished.
Hypothesis #2. After reading documents C,D and E, create a hypothesis regarding the questions: Was appeasement the right policy for England in 1938? Cite evidence from the document to support your answer. (No)
Appeasement was not the right policy for England in 1938. This is because first of all, Hitler was not a man you could appease. If he saw someone’s weakness or something suffer, it would only encourage him. This policy was supposed to prevent war from happening, but war happened anyways. It shows failure of this and that It wasn’t right for their plan wasn’t achieved. Appeasement happened because the memories of the first world war were relatively fresh and they world was still dealing with the depression.
This isn’t good at all because it allowed Hitler to pursue his quest for power and domination. This also gave Hitler confidence and the thought that he could achieve a lot if he wanted to do so. This also showed Hitler that Britain and France were hoping to avoid war at all costs so he knew he could push them and it gave him an advantage of knowing what they don’t want. Appeasement was not right because it was unfair. Just like the treaty of Versailles, talks about giving Czechoslovakia was happening even without the presence of the actual Czechoslovakia. They had extensive industry too, just giving Hitler more power and goods while austria had a large fighting force. During these years Hitler gained power and popularity which helped him fight WWII so successfully. This was also a major cause for strengthening the Nazi’s Germany. Because the surrounding Nations, mainly Britain allowed Hitler to take the territory he wanted, including the Sudetenland from Chezalavokia. This just sprung Hitler’s mindset about spreading communism and his ideas to the world and to take over. If Britain was able to stop Hitler in 1936, all before Luftwaffe grew in strength and power, Blitz in 1940 would’ve never happened. The outcome is also very important and due to this, Czechoslovakia was weakened. Poland and Hungary took other land. This wasn’t in any means what the Czechoslovak wanted and they weren’t even part of it. This also allowed Russia to decided that Britain and France would never have the guts to stand up to Hitler, and so war with Germany was inevitable and was coming. During the time of March 1939, German troops marched into Czechoslovakia. They took over Bohemia, and established a protectorate over Slovakia. The terrorized Czech government was eventually forced to surrender the western provinces of Bohemia and Moravia and finally Slovakia and the Carpathian Ukraine. Chamberlain mis knew Hitler and should’ve never trusted him from the beginning. When Stalin saw that Britain did not help Czechoslovakia against Hitler, he became convinced that Britain would not help the Soviet Union if Germany attacked it. Consequently Stalin signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact with Hitler in 1939, dividing Poland among themselves. Appeasement was useless in stopping someone like Hitler because he was never satisfied with what he had and wanted more. Hitler was a very greedy man and would do anything to fill his needs. It also abandoned millions of Austrians and Czechs to the brutal Nazi terror. If the countries stood up towards Hitler, people believe that war would’ve ended quick or never even occured. And most importantly, this all gave Hitler time to prepare for war and just get stronger. Yes it also have time to the Britians but it just gave more time and ideas for Hitler to do what he demanded. A lot of people also praised and liked Hitler when this came about just giving him more confidence for his future acts.
My response to “Was appeasement the right policy for England in 1938?”
In my opinion, the appeasement was not something that should’ve happened. First of all, it didn’t achieve anything that it wanted to. War did happen later on and it also just gave time for Hitler to get stronger for the war. Hitler was evil, and Chamberlain should have opposed him instead of giving him what he wanted because that was made Hitler more demanding and greedy. It was a big mistake because Chamberlain misunderstood Hitler and just did him good for his future plans. I would like to say that this was a regretful happening because it just gave Hitler confidence that if he wanted to achieve something he could, making him unstoppable. The policy of Appeasement was a system of yields, compromises, and sacrificial offerings to Hitler's Germany that allowed him time to rebuild the German military into an amazing whirlwind machine. Since Hitler wanted more and knew that he could achieve what he wanted, this sprung World War2. It shouldn’t have happened because it could’ve stopped Hitler’s future acts of evil and violence. Even though it gave time for England and France, it also gave time for Hitler and Germany to also gain power and think of ways to succeed. Everyone knew that war was inevitable. It’s just that they were so tired and scared of the consequences of war, that they wanted to believe peace. The war consequences were very damaging. It made England and France very poor in terms of government and made it’s people scared and to live in fear. They had to live with the consequences of war. Since war was going to happen anyway why have an appeasement? That was the question that made me choose no for my opinion. It just gave hope to people that peace could be accomplished and that peace wasn’t something far away. But the truth was that it just gave the people more days to suffer. It is also wrong because giving Hitler something he wanted could stop him for a minute but also make him want something bigger and better. And people thinking that stopping and holding Hitler with a piece of paper was a foolish thought. It was also very unfair because they were talking about the status of Czechoslovakia and how to give it away without actually having them included in the conference and conversation. It was just like everyone resting and being at a happy state thinking there would be no war while Hitler and Germany just gets stronger and improving themselves. So for these reasons, I think that it would’ve been better if appeasement never happened so they could’ve stopped Hitler from getting on the top of his head thinking he could do everything starting his dictatorship.

Criterion A: Knowledge and Understanding.
Maximum 10
Achievement Level
Descriptor
0
The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below.
1 - 2
The use of terminology is inconsistent or incorrect. Facts and examples are either absent, or those used are irrelevant or do not show understanding. The student provides descriptions that are inaccurate or that have insufficient detail; explanations are absent or superficial.
3 – 4
The use of terminology is mostly accurate and usually appropriate, though some errors remain. Facts and examples used are mostly relevant, and usually show understanding. The student provides basic descriptions that may need more detail; explanations are usually adequate but sometimes superficial.
5 – 6
Terminology is used accurately and appropriately. Relevant facts and examples are used to show understanding. The student provides accurate descriptions; explanations are adequate but not well developed.
7 – 8
A range of terminology is used accurately and appropriately. A range of relevant facts and examples are used to show understanding. The student provides accurate and detailed descriptions; explanations are developed.
9 – 10
The student shows an excellent command of a wide range of terminology, and uses it appropriately. An extensive range of relevant facts and examples are used to show understanding. Descriptions are accurate and detailed and explanations are fully developed.

Criterion B: Understanding and Application of Concepts
Maximum 10
Achievement level
Descriptors
0
The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below.
1 – 2
Application of concepts is inappropriate. The student may demonstrate some conceptual awareness and understanding by recognizing basic connections to the subject matter.
3 – 4
Application of concepts is not always appropriate. The student demonstrates conceptual awareness and understanding by describing basic connections to the subject matter.
5 – 6
Application of concepts is appropriate but superficial. The student demonstrates conceptual awareness and understanding by describing connections to the subject matter. The student attempts to apply concepts to other situations but is not always successful.
7 – 8
Application of concepts is appropriate and shows some depth. The student demonstrates conceptual awareness and understanding by explaining connections to the subject matter. The student applies concepts to other situations.
9 – 10
Application of concepts is appropriate and sophisticated. The student demonstrates conceptual awareness and understanding by explaining in detail connections to the subject matter. The student applies concepts effectively to other situations.

Criterion C: Application of Skills
Maximum 10
Achievement level
Descriptors
0
The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below.
1 – 2
The student can select and use some relevant information. The student displays minimal analytical skills. The student’s arguments, decisions or judgments are not always relevant, or may be absent. The student attempts to carry out investigations, demonstrating few skills.
3 – 4
The student selects and uses mostly relevant information. The student’s work lacks the required depth in analysis. The student makes some relevant arguments, decisions or judgments though these are unsupported. The student demonstrates basic investigative skills.
5 – 6
The student selects and uses relevant information. Work shows satisfactory evidence of analysis. Arguments, decisions and judgments are supported and balanced but superficial. The student demonstrates adequate investigative skills.
7 – 8
The student selects and uses a range of relevant information. Work shows a good level of critical analysis. Arguments, decisions and judgments are well supported and balanced. The student demonstrates effective investigative skills.
9 – 10
The student selects and uses a wide range of relevant information. Work shows a high level of critical analysis. Arguments, decisions and judgments are fully supported and well balanced. The student demonstrates sophisticated investigative skills.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Appeasement was the policy followed by the British, and later by the French, of avoiding war with aggressive powers such as Japan, Italy and Germany, by giving way to their demands, provided they were not too unreasonable. My opinion is that the whole appeasement policy was wrong because it was applied to a wrong person. It might have worked with some German government, but with Hitler it was doomed to failure. During the period of the appeasement policy, Hitler was still exploring the terrain…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Was Appeasement Justified

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Was Appeasement a ‘Mistake’? H/W 07.03.13 There are many arguments for and against appeasement before WW2. Appeasement was a policy between Britain, France and Germany. The policy meant that the allies would give Germany what they wanted as long as they didn’t start a war or cause trouble. The Dictionary definition of appeasement is: (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the policy of acceding to the demands of a potentially hostile nation in the hope of maintaining peace. Many people now…

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    further aggression. This policy of appeasement failed to prevent the outbreak of World War II. Below there are a number of arguments. Some prove that appeasement was a mistake and some suggest that appeasement wasn’t a mistake. Create a table with two headings - ‘A mistake’ and ‘Not a mistake’. Write each argument in the correct column. - Germany deserved a fair deal - Germany treated too harshly at Versailles, so were only being given their rightful land. - Germany was growing stronger - Allowed Germany…

    • 300 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    started to think of a solution, and during 1840 and 1850, they argued about whether the slavery was rights or wrongs. After that, Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated as president during Civil War, and then he made the famous Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 -declaring “that all persons held as slaves” within the rebellious states “are, and henceforward shall be free” (qtd. in William). - This proclamation was followed by the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1865 outlawing slavery (Jellaroo, 2012)…

    • 143 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    One may want to say that what George did, that is shooting Lennie, was either the right or wrong decision. To put it into such a black and white decision, right or wrong, good or bad, compassion or unjustification, cannot fully describe the choice that George made. You cannot truly say if what he did was right or not, but simply that he had to. What George did was something that his moral compass told him must be done. How can you say that they would have gotten away if George had done otherwise…

    • 135 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Was Slavery Right Or Wrong

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages

    aftermath of slavery are one of the world’s toughest times towards the millions that suffered the hardship of being black. Slavery of African Americans was where people that were black were forced into working for a white. This had caused pain and suffering and they didn’t know if they are going to die that day or be sold. Slavery of African Americans was wrong because the way that blacks got captured and transported elsewhere to be sold, their miserable life working…

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Was Aristotle Right or Wrong? Jennifer L. Chadwick Grand Canyon University Biology Concepts Lab June 1, 2011 Resource 1: Was Aristotle Right or Wrong? Directions The exercise below presents a scenario that begins with an observation made by Aristotle (4th century BC). The theory of Spontaneous Generation, which suggests that life originated from inanimate matter, was popular in the ancient world. Your assignment is to apply the scientific method beginning with Aristotle’s observation by…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the 1930s, Britain and France adopted the appeasement policy towards Germany. It was to give in to some of the demands of Hitler in the hope that they would be satisfied and not ask for more. The appeasement policy aimed to prevent another large-scale war like the World War I. The appeasement policy was not an error as appeasement bought time for Britain to rearm. In the 1930s, they were still recovering from the tremendous losses in World War I, and were not militarily prepared for a war…

    • 500 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    question. Some historians say that the appeasement wasn't justified and that Chamberlain was a weak person while of the other hand some say that Chamberlain didn't have any other chose. There are a number of reasons that support both of the sides. Appeasement was justified in a few ways, sympathy for Germany, the desire for peace, the threat of communism and the time to rearm. All of these factors explain how the appeasement was justified. Sympathy for Germany, was an accept that mainly concerned the…

    • 799 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    audience there. Lincoln was disappointed to realize, that most people seemed to be for slavery and not against it which only helped Douglas in the debates. In Charleston, Lincoln knew he had to work even harder to come back from Jonesboro. Lincoln took this opportunity to show his support to the Fugitive Slave Law and to break away from the idea of him being an abolitionist. Lincoln made sure that all he spoke was truth and to accept that fact that sometimes he was wrong. Lincoln stated in this debate…

    • 368 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays