Edexcel A2 History - Germany 1900-45 - Monday 8th June 2015 [Exam Discussion Thread]

Please refer to any online article that will clearly explain that the enabling act came about due to manipulation of laws. Sure, it links to veneer of legality but it's not violence.

Okay, I don't know whether I'm misunderstanding you or you're misunderstanding me.

I know that violence was used to reduce the 'opposition' to the enabling act, that's fine. That is how you would link it. But what I'm talking about is the NATURE of the Enabling Act - not how it was passed. I'm very much aware that there were brown shirted SA guys around the chamber and in some way intimidated the Reichstag etc etc. But Enabling Act is an example of manipulation of laws in itself because he passes a legal law with the Reichstags support - he does not ban all parties without consulting the Reichstag. Now, yes, again, he did use violence to intimidate them, and yes, again, this is a link you would make, but the Enabling Act as a law and also as an event comes under something like use of laws or (in your case where you don't have that) veneer of legality. I hope that cleared the air of any misunderstanding and 'naivety'.

Regarding the matter on reiteration, it's clear we misunderstood each other. To, again, clear the air, let me give you an example.

Hitler used laws to consolidate power. One key example is the Enabling Act which ensured that the Nazi party alone was the only legal party allowed to exist - any other party was legally banned. This reduced opposition blah blah blah.


Hitler used violence to consolidate power. Indeed, while the Enabling Act was passed through a democratic election, it could be argued that this was only due to the use of violence and intimidated prior to the act being passed. Before the election began, in fact, brown shirted SA men were milled around the outside chamber and packed the public gallery. What is more, communist deputies were illegally barred by Goering, reducing the votes need to pass the law from 432 to 378. Etc etc.


THIS is what I mean by a good link. I didn't reiterate what I said. I proposed a new context in which the event could be viewed. This is what a top level answer should aim to do at least 2/3 times. Reiterating what I said in the previous paragraph would only support the point I had previously made - that gets you nowhere.

I do hope you agree with me now. Lol.

I'm aware of that - I was talking about how it would link to veneer of legality. If you look at my original post, you'll see I put it under legality in the first place...


Posted from TSR Mobile

What were the opposing groups to the Nazi regime? And what possible question could come up with this title?

Thanks x

"The extent of wartime opposition during World War Two seriously threatened the Nazi regime". How far do you agree?

I'd talk of:
• conservative opposition (Kreisau circle, Goerdeler group)
• assassination attempts (eg: the bomb plot coming under the army opposition too)
• the church (crucifix crisis, T4 programme, Dietrich Bonhoffer)
• youth (white rose group, edelweiss pirates etc)
• communists (SPDs, KPDs, resistance cells in factories, fringe groups such as the socialist front, new beginning, the red orchestra etc)


Posted from TSR Mobile

Surely you didn't expect me to search back and look for the post where you perhaps explained your plan in more detail...

I was just giving my opinion on the brief plan that I saw.

Thank you so much! Your literally are amazing! x

No problem! Hope your revision is going well


Posted from TSR Mobile

It certainly is.

I guess it depends on where you're more comfortable.

But the bottom line is, if you practiced essay writing and know your content, you're guaranteed a good mark. However with Part B there's that sense of the unknown - you don't know what sources will come up and how hard they will be.

Now you might say that's the same with Part A but, again, I would say that if you know your content, there is not a single question you cannot answer.

It was a post where i directly quoted you and explained in my first line "it would go under veneer of legality and could go under terror"


Posted from TSR Mobile

Anyway that's not the point. The point is I thought you were saying the nature of the Enabling Act was an indication of violence - which I then disagreed with.

Yeah it depends on what each individual find comfortable with. You just seem a little over confident thats all :/

Anyway that's not the point. The point is I thought you were saying the nature of the Enabling Act was an indication of violence - which I then disagreed with.

Ah revision :O Its going alright I guess, hows yours going?? x

Yeah, I disagree it's wholly an example of violence, which is why I originally said I merely considered it an example of how terror links to legality.

Anyway, it seems to have been a misunderstanding.


Posted from TSR Mobile

My revision is slow but sure. Getting there steadily but I feel it will be more productive after we break up from college.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Oh sorry I don't mean to come off as an over-confident know it all lol!

I am confident with Part A - reasonably.

But with Part B, you give me a question and I'll **** my pants xD

No but seriously, I'm more worried about Part B and I've only contributed to Part A in this thread - the part I'm more confident with.

I guess it's really because I do tons of essay writing in RE and I did English at AS anyway - im used to writing on the spot and developing arguments - heck! That's all we do in RE! We have to write an amazing argument based on a small extract using all of our philosophical understanding - history Part A is a walk in the park compared to that.

I think I'm completely stumped with my revision. Somehow I've been stuck doing, like, two essay plans this whole week and a half and I can't seem to be able to physically move on ):
Hopefully I'll pick up the pace when we break up or else I'm not reaching that A haha

Im just making plans really, I've given up on doing loads of exam papers x

I don't know if it's the book or what, but I just can't get into it. The red book I have is so boring and stupid. It gives emphasis to points that are irrelevant and then puts subheadings for things that make no sense in relation to the topic!!!! I mean come on... This isn't for a student studying Alevel it's for someone with a genuine interest in Nazi Germany. :l