This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Edexcel AS History 1 Option D3/D4 - 2nd of June

Scroll to see replies

So glad i found this thread! It's reassuring to see that people are prioritising particular topics like me. I've been banking on:

D3
- WW1 and the fall of the Romanovs
- Civil War

D4
- Struggle for Power
- The Great Terror

Basically what didn't come up in the January exam.

If none of these topics come up in the exam I shall crawl up into a ball on the floor and start crying while the invigilators carry me out.

Reply 101

Humanitiesboy123

Stikki

OMG that is the exact same for me haha :woo:

Im sure if everyone who takes this topic thinks these will come up theyre bound to right ? :confused:

Please reassure me :yep:

Reply 102

scarlett_1991

oki i just looked through practise exam questions we've been given and this one is killing me : "how far do you agree that socialist realism was Stalin's most important method of social control?" i just have no idea what i would write, any ideas anyone?

Reply 103

Stikki

Humanitiesboy123

OMG that is the exact same for me haha :woo:

Im sure if everyone who takes this topic thinks these will come up theyre bound to right ? :confused:

Please reassure me :yep:

My instinct tells me that they don't want to be too predictable so they may throw in one or two questions from the topics in january as well. But I think it would be quite mean if they missed out all four of these topics AGAIN.

On the other hand, I'm often wrong about these things and exams seem to like screwing me around so we'll see.

Though like I said, I do have a plan B - with the ball, and the crying and the invigilators carrying me out and what not...

Reply 104

Stikki

scarlett_1991

Wow...perhaps it covers the ruthless policies of collectivisation, five year plans and the great terror as well as socialist realism? That would be covering quite a few topics though.

I don't know really. I would hate to be forced in to answering a question like that.

...

...I'm scared.

Reply 105

Humanitiesboy123

Same... nooo idea. Haha id just have to hope the other option was good.

Reply 106

GEOGEDEXCELHELP

if the five year plans come up i am OFFICIALLY SCREWED.... i veryyy much doubt they will though as they covered that in jan. im praaaaying on nice questions. please examiner pleasse!

Reply 107

scarlett_1991

i'm really really hoping the Dumas or 5 year plans don't come up eep. :frown:

Reply 108

Stikki

I was thininking...

...since the Great Terror didn't seem to come up in the January exam or the example paper, perhaps it is the most likely topic to come up?

Reply 109

GEOGEDEXCELHELP

hmmm il get revising on that then!

Reply 110

Bellrosk

Humanitiesboy123

So i could use the factors :

Pragmatism
Leadership
Centralisation
Ruthlessness?

Yeah, pragmatism in the form of 'State capitalism' and the decree on workers and peasants? I think (Need to look that one up).

They eliminated any opposition - ie: murder of the Romanovs in 1918 crushed any possibility of a Tsarist counter-revolution - Put across the message to Tsar supporters that they weren't going to get their way essentially. Also red terror to crush any uprisings, such as that in the Tambov region in 1920 (preceeded the Kronstadt rising). They closed down the constituent assembly at the end of 1917 after they only received 24% of the vote. Lots of stuff you can put here.

Social reforms such as decree on titles and legislation of divorce, marriage, legality of homosexuality etc. The intention was to encourage equality - 'changing minds' etc. However didn't really work. The 'quick and easy' divorce and marriage laws left thousands of woman pregnant and divorced and marital rape cases soared (for some reason not sure). Similarly, with homosexuality, it had a huge effect on the gay community where it was suddenly legal to be gay there was a surge in the gay population - Lenin saw homosexuality as a Western disease and so made it illegal again 10 years later. Basically their social reforms really didn't work.

War policies - Obviously they won the civil war through a variety of methods. Communism was seen as an 'experiment' and it was vital that it survived the civil war - so they were very motivated.
The Treaty of Brest Litovsk in March 1918 basically just ended WW1 for Russia - inkeeping with Lenin's April Thesis of 'Peace Bread and Land' - Peace in the form of the treaty.

Lemme see. War Communism could link into war - or you coukd group it with economic policies (State Capitalism & NEP) As it continued on after the way - The Kronstadt rising headed by Alexander Kollontai and Schlapnykov? proved that war communism was unpopular - the rising wa crushed - demonstrating the sheer force of the Red Army. But it proved to the Bolsheviks (or Communists at that point) that it was time to move on to a new economic policy (with production at an all time low - and famine and starvation high as peasants produce the bare minimum). The main point of the Kronstadt rising is that those who protested against the Bolsheviks were worker - soviets - were meant to be supporters. NEP was introduced to ease off the restrictions of the economy which was forcing Russia's people into counter-revolutionary behaviour. The NEP did in fact work.

And there's more. IE: Propaganda etc.

Reply 111

Bellrosk

scarlett_1991

i'm really really hoping the Dumas or 5 year plans don't come up eep. :frown:

The reasons for the 5YPS will deffinately not come up as that came up in January. Possibly the effects of it might - or it might be combined with Stalin's other economic policy - collectivisation.

Reply 112

Bellrosk

Does anybody have any quotes from historians, particullarly regarding the first unit?
I have loads from Deutscher and Conquest regarding the second half, however seem to be lacking historiography for the first half.

Reply 113

scarlett_1991

How would you guys answer this questiong?? help!!!? :confused:

How far does Stalin's position as General Secretary explain his success in defeating his rivals in the years 1924- 1929?

Reply 114

A-Man!

Bellrosk - I have some but its better to say what the quote means in your own interpretation.

For the Socialist Realism question I'd talk about how it controlled people and compare it to education, religion and women being controlled. A bit on terror too.

Reply 115

Stikki

Bellrosk

How about:

'The 1905 Revolution did more than anything else during Nicholas II's reign to undermine support for the regime' - Richard Charques (p29 in textbook)

Although it's probably not very useful.

scarlett_1991

How would you guys answer this questiong?? help!!!? :confused:

How far does Stalin's position as General Secretary explain his success in defeating his rivals in the years 1924- 1929?

I would explain that the position of General Secretary allowed Stalin to recruit and promote members, helping him to fill the party with people who were loyal to him.

I would then go on to compare this to other factors such as the personalities of the contenders, the ideological factors, Stalin's tactical manouvring and the how the legacy of Lenin was used (such Trotsky not present at funeral). This helps to establish 'how far' Gen Sec. explains his success.

Keep in mind I only got an E in the mock so this may not be good advice :sigh:

Reply 116

Bellrosk

A-Man, PM me with your quotes :smile:

Scarlett_1991, that should be easy. Have you done the power struggle? Just weigh up the reasons why Stalin won the power struggle in regards to his positions.

Reply 117

OnTheFlop

What option has USA in vietnam and korea?
I know we have that and stalin

Reply 118

A-Man!

OnTheFlop

What option has USA in vietnam and korea?
I know we have that and stalin

Reply 119

GEOGEDEXCELHELP

scarlett_1991

How would you guys answer this questiong?? help!!!? :confused:

How far does Stalin's position as General Secretary explain his success in defeating his rivals in the years 1924- 1929?

Wellll this is roughly what i would put:

introduction: Political vacuum after Lenin's death, created a power struggle for leader. In 1929 Stalin emerged as leader, due to a mixture of carefully planned, cunning events and decisions as well as element of luck. However, it was Stalin's position within the party, as General Secretary, which allowed him to manipulate his position via patronage and placing his supporters in key positions to gain Stalin more support. The fact that he was general secretary led others in party to underestimate him, as G.S = mundane, and regarded as an unimportant position. This underestimation acted as a strength for Lenin, but a weakness for opponents such as Trotsky.

p1 = GS gave him a powerbase and party appeal which proved vital to his success. 'Master of 'Party bureaucracy'. Patronage and key positions. Without this support he may not have been able to rise above his opposition such as Bukharin and the moderates on the right, and Trotsky and the radicals on the left.

p2 - Extremely favourable events. e.g. Prevention of Lenin's testament being published - didnt want stalin to be secretary let alone leader! If it was Trotsky would have appeared as leader.

Lucky that lenin died so early or Stalin could have sent away due to bad relationship, and then ever have been leader.

p3 - ruthlessness and determination. Devious tricks he played on opposition. In the triumvirate they plotted against Trotsky - revealing him as not being favoured by Lenin.

p4 - Ideological factors, Stalin = centre. Trotskys ideas = unpopular e.g. permanent revolution.

p5 - Tactical manoeuvering. all about the duumvirate, triumvirate *dont really understand this bit :frown:

*

conc - Stalin's position as GS was fundamentally the most important reason as it allowed him to manipulate tha party and to build up a powerbase of supporters increasing his party appeal. However, without Trotsky's lack of political skill and unpopular policies Stalin's rise to power may not have been as successful, as Trotsky would have been in the way.