Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Edexcel AS History Unit 1 Option D resit - 18th May 2016

Scroll to see replies

Original post by dauntlesstraitor

I don't necessarily think it will be an early question for civil rights as a 1945-55 question came up in 2014. I really hope it does though. I think MLK is more likely as he came up in 2013

There is an early period question every single year though?

Reply 61

dauntlesstraitor

Original post by SlimShady96

There is an early period question every single year though?

Ah yeah good point, sorry wrote that when I'd just woken up!

Reply 62

username1933801

I'm also taking Tsarist and Stalin's Russia!
Do you think it's safe enough just to revise up to 1917 for Tsarist Russia?
(I despise the Prov Gov and Bolsheviks)
For Stalin I may just try and cover everything from Collectivisation up to WW2.

Previous questions for Stalin were:
June 2015 : Power Struggle and 5 Year Plans
June 2014 : Opponents to Stalin (1928-38) and WW2
June 2013 : Power Struggle and Economy (1928-41)
Jan 2013 : Totalitarian State 1930s and WW2
June 2012 : Power Struggle and Collectivisation
Jan 2012 : 5 Year Plans and WW2

I am not looking forward to this exam :frown:

Reply 63

jodie1912

Original post by SparkleOwl

I love the Fall of the PG!! hoping that comes up, but you should be alright just doing tsarist as they usually do Tsar and then either consolidation or how they came to power!!
Hoping WW2 comes up!

Reply 64

arfaB

Original post by dauntlesstraitor

No are you? I didn't revise it last year either, I just focused on Vietnam

Nope i'm not doing it either, but i have a feeling it might come up because its the last year this paper is being sat. I think the Geneva conference might come up too

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 65

starshine909

Anyone sitting wars of the roses and henry vii? Predictions?

Reply 66

Sademajek

Original post by Kjade

Do you have any predictions for those questions?

i have no clue, just trying to make model essays for each subject that could be asked.

Reply 67

zikra98

Original post by bsbnah

I would've thought that a question on eisenhower and kennedy together would come up

That came up in 2011 so maybe 😲

Reply 68

sghad

really hope MLK / BP comes up or anything on the beginning and middle of VN! Nixon stuff isn't too bad I guess ! Hopefully we all smash it! I got an A on the other paper last year and a D in this one so fingers crossed I do well!!

Reply 69

zikra98

Guys black power cam up in 2012,2013, and 2014...do u reckon it will come up? What about Supreme Court and federal governments?

Reply 70

zikra98

How would you answer

How accurate is it to say that the peaceful protests were the most important reason for the improvements in the civil rights of African Americans in 1955-68?

Reply 71

zikra98

How would you answer

How far was the fear of Communism responsible for the growing US involvement in South East Asia in 1954-64?

Reply 72

bsbnah

Original post by sghad

In terms of vietnam, what do you think will come up?

Reply 73

bsbnah

Original post by zikra98

Guys black power cam up in 2012,2013, and 2014...do u reckon it will come up? What about Supreme Court and federal governments?

Because black power is so popular and they missed it out last year, there is the possibility it'll appear this year. But yes, do the supreme court and federal government too as a back up

Reply 74

dauntlesstraitor

Original post by arfaB

Nope i'm not doing it either, but i have a feeling it might come up because its the last year this paper is being sat. I think the Geneva conference might come up too

Posted from TSR Mobile

It could do actually, the Geneva conference hasn't come up in a while

Reply 75

dauntlesstraitor

Original post by zikra98

How would you answer

How far was the fear of Communism responsible for the growing US involvement in South East Asia in 1954-64?

Fear of communism:

•

Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson believed in domino theory, if Vietnam fell to communism the rest of South East Asia would also

•

Rolling back communism was an important part of Eisenhowers foreign policy

•

Gulf of Tonkin resolution 1964- Use all means necessary to promote the peace and security in South East Asia

•

The formation of SEATO 1954- Protect Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos from communist attack

The failure of the Geneva Accords

•

The USA hoped this would stop the spread of communism

•

However the agreement to hold an election in Vietnam worried Eisenhower because he feared Ho Chi Minh would win, leading to a communist government in Vietnam

•

This was why it was necessary to intervene

The policies of Eisenhower

•

Policy of Rollback

•

Utilised the MAAG which co-ordinated aid to Vietnam

•

Sent 1500 military and political advisors

•

Sent financial aid, by the end of 1961 this totalled 7 billion

•

MAAG helped one million North Vietnamese transfer to the south

•

Described Diem as the miracle man of Asia

•

Was concerned about the high levels of corruption in Vietnam eg Discrimination against Buddhists.

The policies of Kennedy

•

Strong anti communist, quagmire theory, domino theory etc

•

His political advisors McNamara and Rusk were in favour of military action in Vietnam

•

Had a personal relationship with Diem

•

Increased the military advisors and the military training budget. Special forces to train the ARVN

•

7000 strategic hamlets

Hope this helps. Obviously its really vague

Reply 76

SlimShady96

Original post by zikra98

How would you answer

How accurate is it to say that the peaceful protests were the most important reason for the improvements in the civil rights of African Americans in 1955-68?

Okay so you would have to do a paragraph on peaceful protests/MLK and give examples of things they did that was peaceful and evaluate at the end how effective it was. Then personally I would do a paragraph on the violent/non-peaceful protests and things Malcolm X and all that lot did, and again evaluate how effective/ineffective they was. Lastly I would do a paragraph on the actions of the federal government, this includes president, congress and Supreme Court, put examples of cases, legislation such as civil rights act and voting rights act, and then evaluate what impact this had in de facto terms.

In the conclusion simply decide on what you think was the most important, I would say that the federal government was responsible for the changes, but and peaceful protests was what had the most effect on the federal government, However radical protests did also put pressure on the government and kept the issue relevant socially and in the media.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 77

SlimShady96

Original post by zikra98

How would you answer

How far was the fear of Communism responsible for the growing US involvement in South East Asia in 1954-64?

Personally I would structure this differently to what the person above said, I think this way is more efficient and if you pulled this off it would be a band 5 answer, as it would answer the question more effectively, remember it's not a narrative and description of what happened, it's an explanation of why it happened, so in this case the question is not HOW they got more involved, it's WHY, but the question tricks you by saying HOW FAR, if you take out the FAR then it's a totally different question. But you don't have to listen to me.

First paragraph has to be Communism, I would start with talking about the domestic issues, such as red scare, McCarthyism, Domino theory, george Kennans X article, McNamara and dean rusk being very influential Hawks. Transition into foreign policy by talking about the political advantages for the presidents, mention how Truman and Eisenhowers policies were popular and how Kennedy and the democrats were seen as being weak on communism therefore couldn't be weak and appease it, then how Johnson was trapped by kennedys legacy of increased involvement(quagmire theory). So then say this developed into a foreign policy of increased involvement because trumans containment and Eisenhowers roll back were popular therefore in order to win an election they have to get more involved.

2) I would devote this paragraph to the failure of France. Start by explaining how the US fund France $2b per year and then the French lose at Dien Bien Phu 1954. Then in the Geneva accords the USA is the only defender of south Vietnam, then say the result was the 1956 election which was a failure (rigged due to 90% communist support in SV) then finish by saying Eisenhower has no choice but to set up MAAG due to the fear of communism at home, in order stabilise SV, which means increased involvement.

3) South Vietnamese ineffectiveness. Talk about corruption and how Diem is corrupt. How the leadership(Diem & co) is Catholic but the population is majority Buddhist, and how there is a lack of enthusiasm/nationalism in the people for South vietnam. Then talk about their military incompetence, lost every pitched battle before US troops were involved, how the borders are insignificant and how there were substantial communist forces in South Vietnam(Viet cong) which lead to increased military involvement from the US, as they couldn't allow the domino to fall because of the pressure/political advantage at home.

In the conclusion, I would say that even though the fear of communism at home and the failure of France led to initial involvement, south Vietnamese ineffectiveness was paramount in increasing the involvement because even with all of the initial US political, financial and military support they couldn't hold it together, as the state was inherently doomed to fail.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 78

zikra98

Original post by SlimShady96

Personally I would structure this differently to what the person above said, I think this way is more efficient and would answer the question more effectively, but you don't have to listen to me.

First paragraph has to be Communism, I would start with talking about the domestic issues, such as red scare, McCarthyism, Domino theory, george Kennans X article, McNamara and dean rusk being very influential Hawks. Transition into foreign policy by talking about the political advantages for the presidents, mention how Eisenhowers policies were popular and how Kennedy and the democrats were seen as being weak on communism therefore couldn't be weak and appease it, and how Johnson was trapped by kennedys legacy of increased involvement(quagmire theory). So then say this developed into a foreign policy of increased involvement because trumans containment and Eisenhowers roll back were popular therefore in order to win an election they have to get more involved.

2) I would devote this paragraph to the failure of France. Start by explaining how the US fund France $2b per year and then the French lose at Dien Bien Phu 1954. Then in the Geneva accords the USA is the only defender of south Vietnam, then say the result was the 1956 election which was a failure (rigged due to 90% communist support in SV) then finish by saying Eisenhower has no choice but to set up MAAG due to the fear of communismto, in order stabilise SV which means increased involvement.

3) South Vietnamese ineffectiveness. Talk about corruption and how Diem is corrupt. How the leadership(Diem & co) is Catholic but the population is majority Buddhist, and how there is a lack on enthusiasm/nationalism in the people for South vietnam. Then talk about their military incompetence, lost every pitched battle before US troops were involved, how the borders are insignificant and how there were substantial communist forces in South Vietnam(Viet cong) which lead to increased military involvement from the US, as they couldn't allow the domino to fall because of the pressure/political advantage at home.

In the conclusion, I would say that even though the fear of communism at home lead to initial involvement, south Vietnamese ineffectiveness was paramount because even with all of the initial US political, financial and military advisory support they couldn't hold it together, as the state was inherently doomed to fail.

Thank you so much! This was really good to follow, but could you fill me up on the 3rd paragraph in more detail please? On Diem/Buddhists/Vietcong... I don't seem to have s lot of notes to write s full paragraph

Reply 79

SlimShady96

Original post by zikra98

Read the first bit again I edited it, and yeah sure I'll try to expand and give you some examples.

-Diem abuses his position, appoints his friends and relatives to government positions, and in the 1956 election said that 600,000 people voted when there were only 450,000 people registered.

-Buddhists, don't know too much myself , but they were oppressed by the Diems regime, there was an incident of a Buddhist monk that protested by setting himself on fire, and this was covered by the media.

-Viet cong, these were essentially the north Vietnamese forces in South Vietnam, they could conceal themselves as ordinary citizens, they were the ones being supplied through the Ho Chi Minh trail. Basically people that supported communism in south Vietnam became Viet cong.
(this can also be linked into when US used Agent orange to destroy the forestry and whatnot and this led to many people becoming disenfranchised as they were mostly rice farmers and this ruined their livelyhood, which is partly the reason why the US couldn't win the 'hearts and minds' ) -this in brackets is not needed to be explained for this particular essay and would suit the 'why did they withdraw' question.
Juat say that the Viet cong were more effective than SV forces because they could pretend to be ordinary civilians and they were supplied by the north and their guerilla tactics caused the SV forces all sorts of problems. Be careful not to go too far in explaining this as it makes it sound like a North Vietnamese strength rather than a south Vietnamese weakness.