This time the question comes from the 2012 IB test paper 3
Content Area:
Interwar years: conflict and cooperation 1919–1939
15. Compare and contrast the reasons for the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini.
2.2.1 You have this week to craft and write your response for this first round. They should be completed and submitted by 2:00 pm Friday, January 31. You should write one (1) introductory paragraph - thesis with general supporting themes to be expanded on if you were to construct the completed and more fully developed essay. Then outline your comparison for three key points for each leader's rise to power. I will post your initial responses. I will collect the responses and then post them en mass. Submissions after 2 pm will be penalized 10%.
2.2.2 Once the collection has been posted on Friday afternoon, you will have the week to reply to one of your peers - first come first serve. You need to offer constructive criticism and one focused meaningful question about their answer for your peer to answer for the final part.
I will post them as soon as I get them. The longer you wait the less likely you will be to get your first reply posted and this part of the assignment completed. The due date for this part will be midnight Thursday Feb. 6. Submissions after midnight will be penalized 10%.
2.2.3 You will need to reply to the question posed by your critic in concise, supported answer - be sure to provide correct MLA formated citation to your answer. This is due midnight Monday Feb. 10th. I will post IB markscheme Tuesday and we will go through it for the first part of class. Submissions after midnight will be penalized 10%.
Haslam Ford
ReplyDeleteWhile both Hitler and Mussolini wanted to make their countries powerful and respected in the world after their fall in World War I, they had various motivations to become the leaders of their countries and distinct methods on achieving their rise to power. The economic, social and governmental problems in both countries in the interwar period, along with the Great Depression, caused severe tensions within the countries and their people. The Treaty of Versailles, as the result of World War I, also caused disapproval by the people of both countries. With the rise of each dictator there were promises to change their countries for the better of their future and various actions were taken by Hitler and Mussolini in order to gain the unconditional support of their people which was the key to their success as fascist dictators.
I. Why Italy and Germany allowed a dictatorship to prevail
a. People’s disapproval with government
b. Severe economic and social tensions
c. Unfair outcome of the Treaty of Versailles
i. Germany believed the Treaty was too harsh
ii. Italy believed they were cheated out of promised land
d. Their appointment to a higher power
i. Mussolini: appointed by king, prime minister, king maintained power, appointed to prevent civil war
ii. Hitler: appointed by president, Chancellor, sole power, appointed because president believed he could fix the country
II. How Mussolini and Hitler successfully rose to power
a. Intensions
i. Mussolini-Imperialistic, going against certain aspects of treaty
ii. Hitler-Nationalistic, withdrew from League of Nations to go against treaty
b. Opposition
i. Eliminated non-fascist parties and unsupportive people
c. Propaganda
i. Absolute control over the press and media
ii. Manipulated and Persuaded people of the necessity of a dictatorship
d. Acts of power
i. Corruption of youth
ii. Mussolini- Vatican/religion, took power by force
iii. Hitler- Scapegoat, worked his way up from the inside to take power
Haslam-
DeleteI think that the way you outlined your points was great, very comprehensive. You also had a good balance of similarities and differences between the two leaders, and I especially liked how you included their intentions as a key piece of info. I think it would benefit you to incorporate some of these specific points into your thesis/introduction, so as to avoid being too vague.
You briefly mentioned that governmental problems caused many of the tensions within the two countries. Could you expand a little more on this/provide specific examples of how the political situation in each country warranted new leadership?
I think this sticks with the prompt very well in comparing and contrasting. You are looking at the grand prospective, which is very efficent. However I suggest that you go into details that support the big views. An example is Propoganda, which is the main aspect that they expand their dictatorial power, mention how they controlled the press and media, Mussolini- press ownership with Populari; as head director of the socialist newspaper "avanti"
DeleteThe 1929 global Great Depression affected countries around the world, particularly Italy and Germany. When the depression struck people lost their jobs, couldn’t afford food or to take care of their children, and they became unhappy and blamed the government. Citizens across Italy and Germany called for a new government, and both Mussolini and Hitler were their to take over. In Italy the fascist party began to gain popularity and eventually Mussolini was appointed prime minister, and later voted Duce. Similarly, in Germany, the Nazi party gained power and its ideology grew throughout Germany and appealed to those unhappy with the current government. Hitler became the prime minister, and eventually the dictator of Germany. Through their rise to power, both Mussolini and Hitler changed laws, killed opposers, and did what was necessary to ensure they would become dictators. Both dictators appealed to the people of their country, and were given unconditional support. They offered citizens what their current governments weren’t giving them, showed them hope for a better future, and used the outcome of the Treaty of Versailles to fuel their dictatorship. Where Mussolini and Hitler differed is in their ideologies. Mussolini believed in fascism which focuses more on the state, where Hitler believed in Nazism which focuses more on race. These beliefs slightly changed how they rose to power and appealed to their countries.
ReplyDeleteI like how you go into detail about the great depression and their party's rise in popularity amongst the people. I think you should make your similarities and differences more prominent in order to have an essay with specific similarities and differences. Although the points you do have are good, I feel that there are many more that you could touch on; for instance the leaders use of propaganda and speeches?
DeleteOther than that I think it is a very solid introduction for the essay.
Similarities
Delete• Both very powerful speakers who could win over their audiences
• Both countries look for helping in the economic depression
• Both disliked the outcome of the treaty of Versailles
• They were able to gain support of people in their country
Differences
• Their ideals- Hitler: Nazi, Mussolini: communists
• Took much longer for Mussolini to gain total control
• Mussolini was first appointed Prime minister, and Hitler chancellor
• Mussolini created a biased government and voting where Hitler openly used public manipulation to scare people
• Hitler was racially influenced
• In the end Hitler hurt Germany much more than Mussolini hurt Italy
Citation:
Husic, Irma. "Differences and Similarities in Totalitaran Societies of Germany and Italy."Noviar Me. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2014. .
Hitler and Mussolini were similar in their rise to power. Both Italy and Germany were weak and disorganized due to the Treaty of Versailles and inadequate governments. They both developed strong fascist parties to aid them in coming to power. Hitler and Mussolini both came to power in a legitimate way and once they had this power, they seized total power at the opportune moment. However they did differ in their use of the people to obtain to power and the threats that faced the government.
ReplyDelete1. Weak Post-War Government
a. Italy did not receive anything they had hoped for from the Treaty of Versailles. Italy’s government was weak and constantly changing structure due to inefficiency.
b. Germany was greatly damaged by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Germany set up a democratic government that was inefficient and did not help repair the country from the war.
2. Strong Parties
a. Mussolini developed a very strong fascist government that in 1921 won 35 seats in the government
b. Hitler developed the Nazi party and worked to have it become popular with many different types of German people
3. Coming to power legitimately and then seizing total power
a. Mussolini staged the March on Rome in 1922. King Victor Emmanuel then appointed him to the government. During a political crisis in 1925, Mussolini was able to seize total control.
b. Hitler unsuccessfully tried a government upheaval in 1923.Then he tried many times to be elected. He was eventually elected chancellor of Germany. After the death of President Hindenburg, Hitler was able to seize total control.
Can you expand on how Hitler and Mussolini differ? I understand that your last sentence in your intro discusses this briefly, but I would like to know the differences in their use of people specifically. Like who they used (or didn't use) and how they used them, and how that makes them different.
DeleteWhat you have so far is really good and you clearly and thoughtfully outline how they are similar. Good job!
4. Their use of the people to come to power
Deletea. Mussolini focused more on strengthening his party and finding a way to insert himself in the government.
b. Hitler made a point of giving speeches and rallying different kinds of people to his party in order to have popular support in elections.
5. The threats their governments faced
a. In Italy, when Mussolini came to power, there was a legitimate threat of a communist takeover, which is part of the reason the king appointed him.
b. Hitler made up the threats of the Jews to the government to devise a common enemy for the German people to blame for their problems.
Italy and the Rise of Mussolini. n.d. 29 January 2014 .
Meier, David A. Adolf Hitler's Rise to Power. 2000. 29 January 2014 .
While both Mussolini and Hitler became single party state leaders, their rise to power followed different paths and were motivated by different reasons. Hitler’s platform for Germany was based largely around a nationalistic standpoint while Mussolini wanted to regulate the economy of Italy in accordance to the government. Furthermore, Hitler gained momentum behind both himself and his party due to the reparations that had been given to Germany following WWI. This entailed largely of strengthening Germany’s military. Mussolini was not as concerned with strengthening his country’s military. Ultimately, Hitler was able to rise to power because the country desperately sought a leader who could help heal Germany from the severe reparations of WWI while Mussolini was able to rise to power through pure force over the former Italian government.
ReplyDeleteThis is a good basic overview of Mussolini and Hitler’s rise to power. You have done a good job of pinpointing how their rise to power is different from one another, but I think it would be helpful if you were a little more specific. When talking about Mussolini you say he was able to rise to power through force, but what else helped him rise to power? Also, I think it would be good if you mentioned the similarities between Hitler and Mussolini.
DeleteOverall I think this is a really strong start. You covered the comparison part of the prompt really well, but you lacked showing some of the similarities that they had in their rise to power. If you add that in I think you'll be solid.
DeleteIn your introduction, I would more specifically state how Hitler gained momentum due to the reparations Germany was being forced to pay. As it stands, the language is somewhat confusing in that it implies that Hitler was fueled by the economic depression due to the reparations. In your actual piece, I would clarify that the though Mussolini's primary focus was not on improving the military, he was fueled by militaristic tendencies, and his rise to power was due in large part to the Black Shirts- a military of sorts.
DeleteAdolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini both rose quickly to the head of single party states in hopes of making their countries invulnerable great powers across the world. Hitler was originally appointed Chancellor in 1933 because of the economic depression which was defining Germany, thinking Hitler would substantially fix the country. Oppositely, Mussolini marched on Rome determined to receive permission for the formation of his own government; although he was never legally made ruler of Italy, he was revered that way with the King acting as a mere figurehead for the country. Hitler went on to form the Nazi Party based on a fascist nationalism and military rule that aimed to celebrate Germany’s proud past and expanding the empire throughout Europe; he was considered a member rather than the solitary ruler of the Nazi Party. Mussolini ruled as the all mighty leader of his fascist regime which he geared toward control of the Italian economy.
ReplyDeleteI think you give a good overview of both leaders and the differences between them seem distinct. I definitely understand what is unique and different about each leader. However, I think you could include a little bit more detail. Also, what are some of the similarities between the two leaders?
DeleteHitler and Mussolini were both quick to take advantage of their respective country's broken and unorganized state. After the Treaty of Versailles both Italy and Germany were in economic unrest and subject to disheveled governments. Their promises for reform led to fast growing popularity which was aided by their charismatic personalities and influential speaking styles.
DeleteHusic, Irma (2006). "Differences and Similarities in Totalitaran Societies of Germany and Italy." http://www.novinar.me/index.php/english/item/213-differences-and-similarities-in-totalitaran-societies-of-germany-and-italy
Between the world wars of the early 20th century, two of Europe's prominent countries found themselves with fascist regimes in power. In Italy, Mussolini rose to power on the backs of his violent "Black Shirts" as he crushed all opposition and controlled many aspects of Italian daily life. Hitler was elected to the leadership role of the Chancellor of Germany in 1930 after rising quickly through the ranks and establishing the Nazi Party. Both Mussolini and Hitler were powerful speakers and instilled the fire of extreme nationalism in their own countries in order to gain power. As both leaders faced countries with weak economies and dissatisfied people, they promised the rise of the tide. Hitler faced hatred of the Treaty of Versailles and preached for racial cleansing in order to return Germany to its former strength. On the other hand, Mussolini faced the strikes of the communists in the country and promised order and stability while simultaneously promising the riddance of the disrupting communists. Both fascist leaders were similar in their use of power, while one was elected democratically and the other by reorganizing the government, and they gained power due to their promise of reform and strong oratory skills.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking skill
Both were great orators adding to their influence and change of popular opinion.
Promise to rid of a singular group
Both promised the ridding of a singular opposition group, Hitler: a racial cleansing and Mussolini: the communists.
Public support or opinion
Both countries were full of unhappy people due to weak economies and dissatisfaction after the Great War.
Steph-
DeleteI thought your introductory paragraph was well organized and set up an essay perfectly. However, I thought it was lacking in the contrast part of the prompt. You covered the comparison aspect really well. I thought your point on their promise to rid their respective countries of a singular opposition group was very insightful. However, it is important to discuss how they were different but still effective in their rise to power.
So here's my question: How was the rise of power for Hitler and Mussolini different? Please use a specific example.
Thanks Marissa! In order to show the differences between the two I think that it is important to view them as singular leaders. In Mussolini's rise to power, he found more backing within the military and took over the country after forcing his way into politics by consolidating power within his own party and the political sphere until the king appointed him. On the other hand, Hitler was elected as the leader of Germany by the people and rose to power through external political venues by using more oratory in his rise to power rather than being appointed. Another important differences between the two was the economic status that they faced in their campaigns. Hitler faced an economically depressed nation that was severely hindered by the treaty of Versailles and the break down of the German economy and army. Hitler rose to power with promises of economic reform and relief for the ailing country. In Italy, Mussolini rose to power by promising the eradication of the prominent economic threat of the communists.
Delete"Mussilini's Rise to Power - Axis Powers of World War II." Axis Powers of World War II. Web. .
"Hitler's Rise to Power - Axis Powers of World War II." Axis Powers of World War II. Web. .
World War 1 took a heavy toll on both Italy and Germany. The Allies more or less forced the Germans to sign the Treaty of Versailles when they came to the Paris Peace Conference. Even though Germany attended the conference in accordance with Wilson’s Fourteen Points, the treaty did not adhere to these same standards. The Italians were promised land when they signed the Second Treaty of London, but these promises were never fulfilled. Both of these occurrences, accompanied by recession in 1920’s, created severe civil unrest in both countries. Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler were able to rise to power because of the desperation created in Italy and Germany after World War 1. Similarities in the rise to power included racist propaganda and gaining power through technically “legal” means. However, the idea of democracy was much newer to the Italians, which Mussolini used to his advantage.
ReplyDeleteWeak economic climate and unsatisfied masses
Postwar Italy
The Italians were resentful over not receiving the agreed upon territory
Accumulated a lot of debt during the war and had a large amount of unemployment
Lowered postwar government support for the military
Lots of people on strike due to the weak economy
Mussolini rose to Corporal in Italian army and was a professional revolutionary and socialist before he became a Fascist
Postwar Germany
Weimar Republic created
Not very strong, many secret organizations
Hitler became head of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party (AKA Nazis)
Acute depression as result of war
Democracy acted as a system that was forced upon Germany by the Allies
Beer Hall Putsch of 1923
Convincing Propaganda
Fascism
Mussolini used already installed fear of the Bolsheviks by the working class and told them that he would stop a Bolshevik revolution
Claimed that they spared Italy from economic destruction
Claimed that there were major flaws in democracy and failure was imminent
Used fear and false hope to convince people from all classes and areas
Nazism
Used the Great Depression that hit as a channel to lead people
Denounced Treaty of Versailles as a form of national humiliation
Denounced Weimar republic for creating weakness and division within the classes
Anti-Semitism very present in propaganda, even though there were only 600,000 Jew in Germany; blamed them for the downfall of Germany in WW1
Placed into power in different ways
Mussolini
A constitutional monarchy had existed in Italy since Italian Unification
March on Rome, October 1922 - Blackshirts threatened a coup and started to march to the capital. Many members of the cabinet resigned
Parliament names Mussolini Premier of Italy
Received emergency powers to “restore order and introduce reforms”
Wanted to look similar to the image of Caesar
When his rule was about to expire, he announced that the party with the majority vote would receive 2/3 of the seats in parliament
Fascists won majority by rigging the voting machinery
Mussolini demanded to be called “El Duce” or “the leader”
Hitler
The Election of 1930 - Nazis won 107 sears in the Reichstag, up from just 12 seats during the Great Depression
Hitler named Chancellor of the German Republic on January 30, 1933
A week before election day, the Reichstag building caught on fire; it was blamed on the Communists
Storm troopers were released, who forced citizens to vote for the Nazis
The Nazis received 44% of the vote, enough to pass the Enabling Act which gave Hitler dictatorial powers
Anna, you covered great lengths of ground with your support in the outline. But your introduction is lacking a proper thesis statement. The introduction is composed of various supporting reasons, but no single sentence ties it together.
DeleteMy question about this response is;
Isn't there an appeal of the party's philosophy that created support by the public? For example, Mussolini's Fascism had the appeal that things would be done before discussed for months in order to change the economy or other sections of the country.
Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini were two of the most influential single party state leaders up until World War II. By the end of the war, both leaders had been removed from power due to the unrest of other world powers and the dissatisfaction of their own people. Beyond this, the two have many similarities among their difference.
ReplyDeleteThe start of Hitler and Mussolini’s governments were similar in the way that the country was prior to their rule. After the First World War, the economies in Germany and Italy were disastrous, both with extremely high unemployment rates. Hitler and Mussolini took advantage of the weakness of the country and the disarray in the government to take control of the country. Both also gained their power through nonviolent means, being appointed by an outside power due to their legal and political influence. They also both lost power after WWII, Hitler committing suicide once he realized his battle was lost, and Mussolini being removed from power and taken into custody as the war ended in Europe.
The ideology of the two dictators started out similar, but eventually began to vary. Both leaderships were based off a fascist ideology, being extremely nationalist and against democracy. Hitler eventually became more extreme in his beliefs though, blaming all the countries problems on the Jewish population and Communists, transgressing the country into a Nazis rule. Mussolini on the other hand kept on the fascist path during his whole rule, being against socialism and being completely pro dictatorship. Both of their basic fascist ideologies helped them gain support from many different social groups. Both parties promised to help the poor, keep a class system, and promoted nationalism, appealing to the poor, rich, young and old. By eliminating other political parties, both were able to keep their power and force their people’s support of them.
When it came to economic and social policies, the two dictators began to differ more. Mussolini tried to make his country self-sufficient. He outlawed strikes and employer lockouts, but he tried to increase benefits of employees across all the fields of work. He also wanted to form a corporatists state, where representatives from all parts of the Italian economy would come together to discuss common policies. Hitler tried to stop labor strikes and make Germany self-sufficient as well, but his four year plan involved the military with the economy more, and he did not try to raise wages or increase benefits. Mussolini tried to incorporate the church with the state as much as possible, and named the catholic religion the main religion of Italy. He encouraged large families and rewarded large families. Both Mussolini and Hitler made their political affiliation a part of their school system, and children grew up learning only through the perspective of these ideologies. In contrast to Mussolini, Hitler had a lot of issues with the church. He also attempted to oppress women, and they were only allowed in the work force because the factories needed their help during the war. Hitler also tried to eradicate the entire Jewish population of Europe, imposing harsh policies on anyone who was Jewish or who tried to help them.
Overall, Mussolini and Hitler had generally similar policies, but differed in the specifics of the way they ran their countries.
I think you make a fairly good comparison of the two dictators, and I like that you separated the similarities and the differences. However, one thing I would change would be to make it a bit more chronological. In your first paragraph following your introduction, you mention the economic status of Italy and Germany, talk about both their downfalls, then analyze ideology. Had the downfalls of the two dictators been discussed at the end of this paragraph, the overall response would have had a better flow. Besides that, your response was very thorough and factual.
DeleteAlright, thanks! I think structure is what I struggle with the most for these types of things so your feedback is really useful! I'll be sure to keep this in mind next time.
DeleteThe economic and social climates of Italy and Germany during the Interwar years were largely characterized by crisis and instability. The end of World War I had brought about a crippling recession in Italy. Germany was no better off, as payment of war reparations and skyrocketing levels of inflation continued to worsen the growing Depression. Such miserable conditions, where unemployment ran high and the fear of revolution permeated the social atmosphere, proved to be ideal environments in which new leaders could assume power. Both Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini offered strong leadership behind which the war-weary peoples of Germany and Italy could rally. Despite these similarities, the two men differed in how they won the support of their peoples. Hitler appealed to a greater sense of German nationalism in which the actions of the people would contribute directly to the well being of the state. Mussolini appeared to be more invested in securing his own power and attained his goals through measured violence. While Hitler and Mussolini were both authoritarian leaders and rose to power in similar conditions of economic and social upheaval, they each employed different methods in order to gain favor with their peoples.
ReplyDelete• Both leaders exploited the volatile climates of their respective nations and capitalized on social discontentment in order to promote their ideologies (fostered cults of personality, use of propaganda, etc.)
• Hitler and Mussolini came to power differently: Mussolini was appointed Prime Minister by Victor Emmanuel III and assumed power much earlier than Hitler did; Hitler slowly worked his way to the top while Mussolini relied on violence and support from the Vatican in order to gain favor
• Hitler attracted masses of followers with his clear outline of how he would achieve German supremacy; Mussolini had considerably less support
There were many aspects that made Hitler and Mussolini both very similar and very different. They both succeeded in rising to power in the regions they were after, and were both very powerful and controlling rulers, however there were ways in which they approached different aspects that still make them very different. Some way in which they were similar are; first the timing when trying to gain power in these countries was opportune because they both took advantage of when the regions were very weak and vulnerable, and second because they both had tunnel vision towards a majority group of people. The way in which they were different involved; the ideas they based their control over, for example, Hitler seemed to have more social views and reasons for his motivation, while Mussolini had more economic objectives behind his decisions. Another example of their differences is that Hitler had a greater objective of spreading the optimum German Anglo-Saxon race to more of Europe than just Germany, while Mussolini seemed to be more focused on an internal growth and advancement. These are some of the ways in which Mussolini and Hitler were very similar and very different at the same time.
ReplyDeleteDear Abbey,
DeleteThis is a good job of the general outline of the goals and ways of pursuing power of the two dictators, however you could go more in depth. For example, what tactics did they use to persuade their people to follow them? Hitler used his public speaking skills while Mussolini rarely spoke in public and he used propaganda to purpose his ideas to the public. Overall this is a good general and broad introduction paragraph and would lead to a strong essay.
Yeah I agree that this is generally fairly broad and it would probably be good to go more in depth for sure when writing the actual paper. I think if I outlined the different tactics used by both it would help to support my argument. Looking at Mussolini's use of propaganda would also be a really impactful and effective way of showing the difference between the two in the way in which they approached the public and how they decided to go about trying to get them to jump on board with their ideas. If I were to write an actual essay on this, I do however agree elaboration and narrowing of my thesis would probably help.
DeleteAlthough Hitler and Mussolini governed in different countries, both Fascist leaders rose to power due to similar circumstances in their respective states. After WWI, both Italy and Germany found themselves in dire economic situations. This led to high levels of unemployment, and ensuing social unrest and diminishing support for the current democracies. Through their nationalistic policies, Hitler and Mussolini garnered a great deal of public support, which gave them the opportunity to implement drastic governmental changes.
ReplyDelete•Postwar Economy
◊ Italy suffered from inflation and debt after WWI, which was considered to be a pointless war for that country.
→ this led to unemployment, food shortages and strikes
◊ After WWI, Germany was forced to pay reparations. They attempted to recoup their losses through aggressive social spending, which put the country into massive debt.
◊ Many protective tariffs discouraged German exports and further depressed the economy.
→ However, Hitler had a plan for economic recovery
**Citizens of both countries were vulnerable to manipulation by strong-willed leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini who claimed they could lift their nation out of economic depression.
•Lack of support for current. democratic government
◊ Due to the depressed economic state, Italians and Germans were disillusioned with their democratic governments.
◊ They believed that their governments were ineffective in mitigating their respective economic crises.
◊ Unemployment pushed citizens to the left, as they feared revolution.
** In both countries, political parties were class-based, causing them to be unpopular among the general public and leading to overall disillusionment with democracy.
•Desire for a strong leader
◊ Mussolini had a good relationship with the Vatican.
◊ Powerful paramilitary aspect of fascist government drew many supporters who feared revolution and opposition.
◊ The Fascist party was gaining popularity in Germany
** Both Hitler and Mussolini spoke to the Nationalistic sentiments of their states, invoking both National pride and hate towards those who opposed them.
The reasons for the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini were very similar. Both states were in an economic depression, thus resulting in the need for a "stable" leader. Italy faced economic hardship after WWI, and Germany had a weakened government due to the Weimar Constitution, as well as the financial aid cut from the US due to the Stock Market Crash. Both leaders exhibited extreme nationalism, which appealed to the people because of their lack of knowledge, and their desire for a stable nation. But, a difference that must be considered is that, Italy called for strong leader due to the lack of land they received after the treaty of Versailles, whereas Germany called for a strong leader due to the fact that nearly all their land and their way of living was taken after WWI.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I think this is a solid intro paragraph. I think you effectively use evidence to support your claims. I would maybe recommend being more specific when you mention nationalism. Can you talk specifically about how these leaders exhibited nationalism and was there a particular type they exhibited? Also, I think it would help if you were a little less ambiguous when you say the nationalism appealed to the people because of their lack of knowledge. In what regard were they lacking knowledge? And how did this lack of knowledge lead to an interest in a nationalistic leader? Finally, I think a solid concluding sentence (thesis statement) would help to wrap up your intro paragraph and provide you with one single, concise guiding statement for the rest of your essay.
DeleteHitler rose seemingly out of the ashes of a post WWI Germany that was struggling heavily economically and Hitler gained the trust of the general public in Germany by improving the economy significantly. He also used nationalism as a ploy to get the nation to follow his plan just long enough so that by the time many Germans realized he was murdering millions of innocent people he had too much military power to be seriously opposed from within the country. Hitler and Mussolini's major similarity was their fascist political views and structure. Mussolini however in the WWII era was more of a pawn for Hitler to gain territory considering the the Italian military at the time was very weak compared to Germany's. Also, Mussolini experienced a good amount of resistance from within his own country as more than once somebody attempted to assassinate him. He used the police power of the Blackshirts to crush small rebellions throughout the early part of his rule. He lack of a sense of nationalism in Italy and a lack of public following kept him from having nearly as much power as Hitler ever had during his reign over Germany.
ReplyDeleteWeston,
DeleteThough all of this is accurate in outlining some similarities between the two, it doesn't really address the original question, which was focused on their rise to power. Instead of addressing the means by which they got to where they were, you outlined how they differed in the way they dealt with their respective nation, and it's issues. You mostly avoided the rise to power for Mussolini. For Hitler you addressed how he rose out of a post WWI world, however, you never mentioned how this is similar or different to Mussolini. My question to you is now this: What were the distinguishing factors of Mussolini's rise to power?
John Ste.Marie
Weston, I think you started off very strongly. The economic situation in Germany is one of the most important points to make in response to this question. However, I think you deviated slightly from the prompt later in your response. Stick to the reasons for the two leaders' rise to power, the factors within their states and throughout Europe that led to their respective ascents to dictatorship. Don't focus on what they did. I think you can still use examples such as the Blackshirts, but explain what problems the Blackshirts addressed, such as the need for strong leadership to quell opposition.
DeleteYou're on the right track, though.
While the rise to power for Hitler and Mussolini were executed in a similar manner, they had different levels of success and different goals for their rein in power. Both leaders became ruthless dictators by gaining the support of the working class. However, Hitler achieved loyalty much sooner and with more ease. Mussolini struggled to become Prime Minister and still lacked support of his people. He resorted to creating affiliations with the Catholic Church and industrial businesses whereas Hitler did not. Once in power, both dictators had a goal of “getting rid of” some foreign influence. But in Hitler’s case, this was the Jewish population, and for Mussolini it was any foreigner threatening Italian Fascism and consequential nationalism. Even though Mussolini and Hitler share common methods and similar goals, the difference in personalities and execution are apparent.
ReplyDeleteI think you compared the two leaders well and used appropriate facts to support your claims. One thing that I think is important to add to your answer is…
DeleteIn what ways did the political and economic circumstances in each country after World War I enable Mussolini and Hitler to come to power?
Great question Emily! I'm glad that you asked!!! At the time, both Italy and Germany were in economic and political turmoil, leaving the subjects open to accepting a new leader. Mussolini took advantage of the governmental disorganization and told the people that the constitution under fascism would improve the political and economic situation. In the case of Hitler, the country of Germany had recently gone through seven different leaders, leading to poverty and conflict among the people. Hitler took advantage of the chaotic environment to assert his power and leadership.
DeleteBoth Hitler and Mussolini rose to power under similar circumstances. Why they rose to power was very influential on how they rose to power and how they maintained a position of power: with a failing government in both countries, both Hitler and Mussolini looked like good choices for rulers. They belonged to popular political parties and promised much needed governmental reform.
ReplyDeleteWHY THEY ROSE TO POWER:
Similarities:
-There was public upset with the government systems in both countries.
-Both dictators belonged to the political group that was in the process of gaining support within their country: both Mussolini and Hitler were a popular choice at the time.
-Both dictators had strong support from a large population.
Differences:
-The origins of the public upset within Italy and Germany differed. In Italy, the public thought that their government was “useless” and desperately wanted reform. This was driven mostly by the fascist party, and so the king appointed Mussolini, a strong fascist leader, to appease the public’s needs. In Germany, the republic government was failing, but Nazism was growing more popular. Hitler was a strong and well-liked leader of the Nazis, and available to lead Germany.
-The origins of the dictators’ support differed. Mussolini gave the population no choice but to support him, using force when needed. Hitler took a different approach, using the popular belief that Germany was the victim of World War I. In addition, he gave Germans someone to blame for their problems (the Jews), allowing them a sense of appeasement.
HOW THEY ROSE TO POWER:
Similarities:
-Both were appointed after it was obvious that the people of the countries were dissatisfied.
Differences:
-While Mussolini was appointed after the March of Rome to be Prime Minister of Italy (by the king) in hopes of avoiding a civil war, Hitler was proclaimed Chancellor by President Hindenburg because their republican system was failing.
HOW THEY KEPT POWER:
Similarities:
-Further power was obtained using unfair methods and manipulation.
-Neither leader was afraid to wipe out other political parties.
Differences:
-While both obtained further power using unfair methods, Mussolini did so by creating a more biased government and voting system. He abolished all non-fascist parties and reassigned government positions to fascists. This created an obviously fascist-influenced government. Mussolini used government manipulation and force. Hitler used public manipulation. He framed communists of committing various crimes to wipe out the Germany communist party. When President Hindenburg died, Hitler abolished the title of President and became ruler.
-By rigging the government to only include fascist party members, Mussolini created a country that was in his favor. He formed relationships with the Vatican, which helped his popularity. Through this, he was able to create a law that would ensure his election.
-Hitler used popular opinion for his support. He framed other political parties until only Nazism remained. He manipulated public opinion more than Mussolini.
This is an extremely solid start to a good introduction paragraph followed by a well rounded essay. You have examples for how they kept power, how they are similar, and how they are different. Now all you have to do is give a little more introduction to these ideas in the introduction paragraph and you will have a well structured intro paragraph.
DeleteThanks for your suggestion! I will re-do my intro so it looks like this:
DeleteBoth Hitler and Mussolini rose to power under similar circumstances. Why they rose to power was very influential on how they rose and maintained a position of power. Both Hitler and Mussolini looked like good choices for rulers: the government in their country was failing at the time, they belonged to political groups that were rising in popularity, and they had a lot of support from the general public. Their ways of rising to power and methods of keeping power were also very similar: they were both appointed and ruthless in their wants. These similarities in the three areas of why they rose to power, how they rose to power, and how they maintained power are very general, however. There were many smaller differences between them underneath the general similarities.
Introduction paragraph: Mussolini and Hitler shared many Fascists ideals because Nazi fascism was based off of Mussolini’s fascism. Mussolini perceived that socialism did not contain the right ideas (although he was originally socialist) and realized that the Italian masses were nationalist. Because of this Mussolini shaped his Fascist government which in turn aided in the creation of Hitler’s Fascist government. They shared many qualities as far as economic and political policies. Both Mussolini and Hitler used legal and effective tactics to gain power. One of their biggest methods was to appeal to the masses, and promise change. Both leaders wanted to strengthen their nations.
ReplyDeleteHitler reasons for rise to power: Ability to persuade through public speeches, the public desire of a change from the weak Weimar System, and public resentment from WWI and the outcome of the Treaty of Versailles (made Hitler appealing).
Mussolini reasons for rise to power: Promised to improve economic conditions of Italy, Mussolini incorporated ideas of nationalism into his fascist ideas, and promised to regain power that Italy had during the Roman Empire.
You had very good information in this paragraph and I thought it was a very good preview to an essay. I think it would be easier to follow if you rearranged it so that you summarize each leader first (your last two paragraphs) and then compare and contrast them in the following paragraphs. Also, in your first paragraph, you mentioned how they both used legal tactics. I would very briefly mention one or two legal tactics that they each used. But all in all, your paragraph contained very good information and would be a very good start to an essay.
DeleteThanks Cullen, to take into consideration what you suggested, I suppose I would just talk about Hitler’s reasons for rising to power, and Mussolini’s reasons for rising to power in the first paragraph. I would summarize how both leaders came to power for their specific reasons. Then I would begin two new paragraphs; one comparing and the other contrasting the methods of the leaders. You wanted me to explain a legal tactic that they both used. This could include simply just the fact that they were persuasive in their ideas, and capitalized on the fact that their countries needed to recover from economic downfall. Thanks again for the advice!
DeleteBoth Hitler and Mussolini took power in a difficult time for their respective countries. Both Italy and Germany were in the midst of economic depression. Because of this, both leaders were able to take power due to their fascist philosophies that sounded like the difference that was needed to jumpstart the economy. This fascist ideology provided a stable centralized government that allowed for policies to be passed and enacted quickly. However, Hitler's power came mostly from using the Jewish population of Germany as scapegoats for the economic depression, and Mussolini used the termination of the apparent government corruption to take power. Despite the fact that Hitler and Mussolini both took power in a weak time for their respective countries, they both used different methods and slightly different platforms to take power.
ReplyDelete1. The economic hit Italy and Germany harder because of World War I. Because of this, the governments of both countries were weakened, allowing both Hitler and Mussolini to take power.
2. Their actual means of obtaining power were quite different in that Hitler used the weak government to climb quickly through the ranks, and Mussolini took over during the March on Rome.
3. Hitler's policies surrounded the idea that to be German was a reason for pride, so many non-German peoples were oppressed and put into concentration camps. Mussolini, however, focused on reforms surrounding the economy.
World War I had left much of the western world weakened both in economic strength as well as spirit. The monarchical ruler of the past had been removed from much of Europe, allowing for a vacuum of power. This vacuum eventually gave rise to the single party, fascist rule in Germany and Italy specifically. Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini were able to seize power in their respective, floundering countries. For Hitler, this was due in large part to the weakened political and economic status of Germany, as well as his own powers as an orator. Mussolini's rise to power can be attributed to the weakness of the post-war Italian government, his status within the military, and again, his abilities as an orator. Though similar in the strict rule over their countries, aspects of both German and Italian policies were ultimately responsible for the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini.
ReplyDeletePOINT 1: Economic weaknesses were responsible for both ruler's rise, The Great Depression caused a global depression that affected much of the world.
SUBPOINT A: German reparations had left the Weimar Republic weak and downtrodden by the rest of the world.
SUBPOINT B: World War I had drained much of Italy's resources, and as such, most political systems were not trusted as they had failed to help the economy recover.
POINT 2: The treaty of Versailles and the subsequent war had left both countries without a stable government effective enough to both command respect and face crisis.
SUBPOINT A: The Weimar Republic had a weak enough and poorly written Constitution, such as to allow Hitler to legally gain power and maintain Chancellor status until his death.
SUBPOINT B: The five intermittent governments held by Italy between 1919 and 1922 had failed to inspire any sort of nationalism within it's citizens. Mussolini's strong military background and "Black Shirts" were looked at as the only alternative to the other failing alternatives.
POINT 3: Oratorical skills were ultimately responsible for the leaders ability to seize power.
SUBPOINT A: Both Hitler and Mussolini were known for their skills. Both obtained power in a political, legal manner. Hitler was elected to his position, while Mussolini was supported by King Emmanuel III.
The introductory paragraph and the outline you made are both very well written with reference to both economic and political reasons. However, although both leaders had many similarities in their rises to power, you present the mostly similarities and not as much the contrasting part of the prompt. Contrasting the two would be key in showing why the two leaders, although similar, were ultimately unique in their dictatorships. So my question to you is:
DeleteIn what ways were Hitler and Mussolini dissimilar in their rises to power due to conditions in their country or their own personal character?
Although Hitler and Mussolini, two major European leaders in the first half of the 20th century, rose to power in strikingly similar ways, some differences in their accumulation of political influence made each leader distinct. Hitler and Mussolini were largely able to gain their levels of power because of the condition of their respective countries at the time. Both Germany and Italy were dealing with struggling economies along with governments lacking stability. This set the stage for a powerful leader to come in and take control. In addition, both men were leaders of major political organizations, which only propelled them into positions of power. Hitler became the leader of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (which came to be known as the Nazi Party), and Mussolini formed the fascist party. As heads of these organizations, taking control of their countries seemed inevitable. However, differences in their ascensions to power existed. Hitler was incredibly forceful with his accumulation of influence, using his impressive speaking speaking abilities as well as techniques like mass communication, violence, and presenting ultimatums when necessary. Mussolini, however, though still not shy in gaining power, was slightly different. The fascist party was invited to join the coalition government and Mussolini was invited by the king to form a government. Overall, Mussolini and Hitler rose to power in remarkably similar ways, though differences between the two did differentiate them.
ReplyDeleteKey points:
Mussolini:
-Became leader of fascist party
-Took advantage of current state of Italy
-Circumstances worked to his benefit (and he used his own force as well)
Hitler:
-Became leader of what was known as the Nazi Party
-Took advantage of the current state of Germany
-Used his speaking skills and other techniques like violence and mass communication to spread his message and accumulate power and influence
Lauren, I really liked the points that you brought up. However, I think your argument could easily be strengthened by being a little more specific. I'm sure that your "key points" would be expanded upon as well. Also, when you mentioned the inevitability of their taking power I think that you would maybe want to either back this up more, or eliminate it. Overall, good work.
DeleteMinor, unrelated point-- you wrote speaking twice when you were talking about Hitler.
DeleteOther than that, I think that you should also talk about Hitler's technical rise to power in that it was somewhat similar to Mussolini in that he too came in a legal manner. In your essay, I would talk about the significance of their similarities in their overall rule of the countries. Also, I think your last sentence could be strengthened, because it says "differences between the two did differentiate them" which is redundant. By strengthening the point behind this distinction your essay will be more specific.
Thanks, Graham. I know the key points are brief, but I would definitely expand on those in a full essay. To be more specific in the beginning, I would mention that much of the economic turmoil was a result of WWI. I think I would also tie in that the lack of stability in these countries was largely due to the lack of monarchical ruler. Previously these countries were under such leadership, but there was a gap that needed to be filled; these particular men were ready for that job. As for the part about the inevitability of their taking power, I don't think I want to eliminate this, so I might just emphasize that this inevitability was really a result of the fact that they were the heads of these two incredibly influential/ powerful organizations/parties in a time when a strong leader was needed. This made their transition into total power more expected and seamless.
DeleteThere are many similarities between the rise of power of fascist dictators Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler.
ReplyDelete1. Both Italy and Germany faced economic problems before fascism took over these nations. High inflation and unemployment rates would lead citizens of each country to turn to a fascist leader that promised a better economy. Mussolini and Hitler gained support among an array of classes with this promise.
2. A sense of anticommunism rose among the wealthier, conservative groups in each country. These fascist leaders were able to secure funds with the help of these conservative groups and promised to repress Communism in these nations. In Italy, factories and land was being seized my workers and peasants, much like the events in Russia at this time. In Germany, the Communist population would increase to 15% as a result of the failing economy.
3. Nationalism increased in both nations after World War I. Both Italy and Germany longed to return to a previous, more powerful state and gain new territory. However, Germany targeted the Jewish and Communist communities and blamed them for several of their problems, unlike Italy.
4. Both nations had a weak, fragmented government that was unable to keep order or improve the economy.
5. The Italian and German society were nearly willing to accept a fascist government, though for different reasons. At the time, most Italians were illiterate and poor, and therefore had their minds on other matters aside from the government. Many Germans remembered the success of the autocratic rule of Bismark and preferred this type of system over a democratic one.
6. Lastly, both Mussolini and Hitler ruled using military background, groups such as the Black Shirts and Storm Troopers, and violence.
I think that your 6 points of similarities are really strong. However, the question asks to compare and contrast them, so it would be better if you included their differences too! I found it easiest to just use the similarities that you found, but talk about what differed within them as well. For instance, number 4 says that both nations had weak governments. Both of these governments were failing for different reasons, so maybe you could discuss that.
DeleteThanks for the feedback, and you make a good point.
DeleteTo improve my answer I might say, for example: Italy's government consisted of several coalition governments that were highly unstable, whereas Germany's government faced several disputes between the rightists and leftists, who disagreed on how to best rule the nation in terms of both economy and religion.
Both Hitler and Mussolini were determined to rule a country that was both powerful and respected in the world. While Hitler strived to bring Germany out of an economic depression brought on by war debts, the Fascist Mussolini desired to restore and expand Italian territories. Both of these leaders used the weak coalition government and weak political structures to gain power in their countries. Each territory also had a crumbling economy as Italy was in a post-war recession and Germany was dealing with the impact that the Depression left. Both countries had high unemployment levels, which led the population to support the leftist-groups. This also created a fear of revolution for those in Italy and Germany. Democratic governments were not supported at this time due to the desire for a strong single leader. For both of these leaders, the political parties that existed in coalitions made having an effective government extremely difficult and also weakened the support for a democratic government.
ReplyDeleteKey points for Hitler’s Rise to Power:
• Had great popular support
o Appeared somewhat democratic
• Created a clear government/ideal that attracted mass support
• Instilled a fear of communism
Key points for Mussolini’s Rise to Power:
• Had a very small party
• Violent tactics
o Squadrismo was used to weaken Liberal governments (1919-1922)
• Public works programs
o Pontine Marshes, job opportunities etc…
I like what you have here Mallory. You have strong points and evidence. How can you make the differences more clear? I feel like you have a lot of similarities in your opening paragraph, but not as many differences.
DeleteI believe that when speaking about strictly these two dictator's rise to power, contrasts are definitely limited. Something that could be added is that the Italian system was never as brutal as the Nazi Regime in Germany (in the beginning). Also, Mussolini was more successful in his policy of religion than Hitler was after his agreement with the Pope in 1929.
DeleteHusic, Irma (2006). "Differences and Similarities in Totalitarian Societies of Germany and Italy." http://www.novinar.me/index.php/english/item/213-differences-and-similarities-in-totalitaran-societies-of-germany-and-italy
During the interwar periods of the early to mid 20th century, both Germany and Italy were at a standstill in acquiring more land and operating a successful government. Hitler and Mussolini shared similar ideas on how the nation should be structured, but also had their differences in the process of establishing their dictatorship. By implementing an authoritarian style government, Hitler and Mussolini used strong propaganda to gain popularity which proved essential in maintaing their position as dictator.
ReplyDeleteGeneral supporting themes to be expanded:
Similarities:
Propoganda
Ambition for land
Restore power/wealth
Policies (use force to overthrow previous government)
Differences:
Mussolini adopted communist techniques to destroy opposition
Hitler opposed communism, Judaism, races, etc
This looks like a good start! One thing that could be helpful/provide more information to write about would be to include that there were some differences between their ideologies as well. I think that it is significant to include this because it is a compare AND contrast, so there will be quite a few differences in the ways they built their single party states.
DeleteThe rise of power of Hitler and Mussolini was similar in many ways but minor differences between them led to different outcomes for their respective countries. Similarities between the two included some of the factors that led to their rises to become possible. This included their disapproval of the outcomes of the Treaty of Versailles. The treaty did not favor Germany or Italy in any particular way so since the two leaders didn’t like it, this provided them extra popularity with the people of their countries. Another factor was that the governments and economies were in terrible conditions after the war. This gave them the opening in government for a new leader. The people of Italy and Germany wanted someone new after both countries did not do well in the war and lost a lot. One big difference with Mussolini was the way that he played a tactical game to get his spot. He used a lot of force to get to the top but one of the biggest actions he took was his use of the Vatican. He formed an alliance with the Vatican in Rome and this got him appointed Il Duce. The Vatican was very popular in Italy at the time with all the Italians so this was very effective. Hitler’s main difference was that he got his way to leader by working from inside the existing government and working his way up. When President Hidenburg died the position of president was gotten rid of and Hitler rose to leader. So the factors that led to Hitler and Mussolini’s rise were very similar but the main differences were how they personally got up to power and took over their respective countries.
ReplyDeleteOverall, this is a very good start for your introductory paragraph and I believe it covers all the bases for Mussolini and Hitler's rise to power. Maybe go over what methods each dictator used and if one was more successful than the other?
DeleteThat is a good idea, adding which was more successful in the introduction would probably give good background information and also help focus the aim of the rest of the paper after the introduction. As for the methods, those would definitely be discussed in the following paragraphs in more detail.
DeleteBenito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, leaders of Italy and Germany, respectively, rose to power due to the post-WW1 recession in Italy and following the Great Depression in Germany. Both relied on general dissatisfaction with the previous democratic political system, as well as the fear of revolution and a decomposing economical situation to convince the national public to support their fascist agendas. However, Hitler had much more popular support, enabling him to push his expansionist ideals with little resistance (initially), while Mussolini depended on force to realize his vision of a newer Roman Empire.
ReplyDeleteI. Benito Mussolini
A. General background information
B. Conditions that led to Fascist control (similarities)
i. High unemployment
ii. General dissatisfaction with deteriorating government
iii. Fear of revolts (democratic divide)
C. Mussolini's aims
i. Overthrow the democratic government by means of a violent revolution (1924).
ii. Promote national strength and economic recovery
a. Supported aggressive nationalism
iii. Establish a totalitarian single party state
D. Conditions that led to Fascist control (dissimilarities)
i. Use of force to establish control
ii. Exploited fear of socialist revolution
E. Conclusion
II. Adolf Hitler
A. General background information
B. Conditions that led to Nazi control (similarities)
i. High unemployment
ii. General dissatisfaction with government (Weimar)
iii. Fear of revolts (democratic divide)
C. Hitler's aims
i. Third Reich
ii. German expansion
a. Aryan superiority
iii.
D. Conditions that led to Nazi control (dissimilarities)
i. League of Nations condemned rearmament
ii. Exploited fear of Communism
iii. Aryan superiority beliefs
iv. Rise through political ranks
E. Conclusion
3. Conclusion
As an outline, this is a good start. However, I think that it would be a lot more helpful if you included more specific information. For example, what about Hitler and Mussolini's backgrounds could lay the groundwork for the way they would lead their countries? Also, it would be helpful to include the repercussions that occurred after each stage of the policies that they implemented. Also, as an organizational tool, it might be helpful to state which aspects of the leader you are going to compare in your intro and then organize your paper around those aspects, rather than doing separate paragraphs on each leader. This will also make the comparison more obvious for the grader.
DeleteAnna, I agree that my introductory paragraph was insufficient and poorly written, especially considering what you have suggested. It was a very roughly composed answer that was rather vague. A better introductory paragraph would read as follows:
DeleteBoth Benito Mussolini, Fascist leader of Italy, and Adolf Hitler, Nazi leader of Germany, came to power after the first World War. Declining economic situations in both countries following World War 1 caused the decline of already low living standards. The general population of Italy feared the threat of Communism, and the same was true in Germany, providing fascists another advantage over competing policies. The Italians and the Germans both recognized their weak governments and the failure or lack of traditional democratic policies, which only contributed to the rise of both dictators who promised a totalitarian political system. Mussolini championed extreme nationalism and exaggerated national accomplishments, as did Hitler, when appealing to national pride. However, both leaders seized control over their respective countries in different ways. Mussolini seized power neither by popular vote nor by parliamentary majority, but rather by a march on Rome. This march conducted with the Blackshirts, a fascist paramilitary armed group in Italy, effectively intimidated King Victor Emmanuel III, who requested Mussolini to form a government. Oppositely, Hitler rose through the ranks in the Weimar Republic and immediately called for elections following his direct appointment to chancellor. The Nazi Party narrowly won its support with intimidation, violence, and propaganda, allowing Hitler to overthrow the Weimar Republic and assume dictatorial powers. Mussolini pushed his policies with the goal to create a new Roman Empire which he would lead as Emperor, while Hitler incorporated anti-Semitism with his expansionist goals of conquering Europe.
Although no one factor ensured the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini, several common themes may be isolated as key points for their success in installing fascist dictatorships in Germany and Italy prior to World War II.
ReplyDeleteThese factors begin on an individual level, encompassing both Hitler’s and Mussolini’s personal magnetism and ability to rise through ranks to gain political experience and power. Hitler’s shrewd oratory skills and political engagement after WWI allowed him to quickly rise through the ranks of the already established German Workers Party (later the NSDAP or Nazi Party) into a position of great political power within the party. Mussolini also used his great political engagement and passion to rise in the ranks of the Italian Socialist Party gaining political experience and power. Unlike Hitler, however, Mussolini experienced a break in ideology with this party and used his gained political acumen to solidify the Italian fascist movement into his own party.
In a wider perspective, Hitler and Mussolini used their influence before their seizure of power to create militaristic organizations to suppress opposition and clear the way for their later command of the government. Hitler used his position within the Nazi party to create the “Gymnastics and Sports Division” of the party, originally with the purpose of suppressing opposition and keeping order within party meetings, and evolving into the SA “storm troopers” which helped Hitler use force to antagonize and suppress opposition such as the KPD (Communist Party of Germany). Very similarly, Mussolini used his connections with his military past to create the Blackshirts, fascist veterans who both kept order on the streets and also suppressed communists and other opposition groups. For both dictators, as their power grew, their utilization of militaristic organizations grew also, used for intimidation and suppression.
Finally, on a national scale, Hitler and Mussolini both utilized popular nationalistic sentiments and fear of communist revolution to build political support and success to a point where they could use this power to seize control of their governments. In Italy, this took the form of government non-interference with the rule of Mussolini’s Blackshirts due to fear of communist influence which culminated in the March on Rome coup d’etat in which the prime minister was ousted and Mussolini invited to create a new government. Similarly, prior to the appointment of Hitler as Chancellor of Germany through Hindenburg, the NSDAP became the largest political party in the Reichstag and gained the power necessary to politically maneuver Hitler into the role of Chancellor through Papen and Hindenburg.
While the rise of Hitler within the NSDAP contrasts the conscious creation and molding of the Italian Fascist Party by Mussolini, ultimately the rise of Hitler and Mussolini mirrored each other in their personal successes, creation of militaristic organizations designed for political suppression, and their use of nationalistic and anti-communist sentiments to gain the political power necessary for government coups.
Both Mussolini and Hitler were obsessed with making their country respected and powerful. The approach they took to get to power were different but they had similar methods. The both established their single party states during the interwar periods when their countries were under lots of tension. Mussolini used propaganda to purpose his ideas and help develop his totalitarian single party state. Mussolini also formed groups of terrorists to disrupt the socialist party and by 1922 the Fascists began using violence as a form of intimidation. He also reformed the Milan faciso into the Faciso Italiani Combattimento which consisted of 200 hundred members and was responsible for many reforms. It grew so quickly that Mussolini was very soon elected to the Chamber of Deputies. Hitler, on the other hand, had the complete and total support of his people. He exploited the weakness of the Weimar Republic to establish his dictatorship and at the time, many people of Germany wanted a dictator and no one was strong enough to stop him. Hitler used Nazi propaganda to convince Germany that the Jewish people were to blame and Hitler was their last hope. A huge factor in Hitler's rise to power was that he was a brilliant speaker. He had his entire country supporting him and believing in him which gave him easy access to power.
ReplyDeleteHanna- I think you have really good ideas throughout this entire intro that would be easy to elaborate on into an entire essay. I thought it was interesting and insightful that you explored the idea of each leaders individual support group, and how they each tried different methods in gaining trust from the people of their countries. It would be interesting in an actual essay to talk more about these different strategies, and maybe compare and contrast them to analyze the strengths and weaknesses from each leader. Overall, I think you have a good start for what could be a solid essay. My one question would be; personally, which leader do you feel had a more efficient and effective strategy in attempt to gain followers and supporters?
DeleteAbbey- This is good advice and I see how comparing their strategies in gaining support would be beneficial for my essay. To answer your question I would say that the Hitler had a more effective strategy because his speaking skills were phenomenal and people actually felt as if they knew him as a person. Mussolini however, rarely spoke in public and left his people feeling as if they were trusting a picture on a poster rather than a person. This I'm sure really effected the outcome of the two dictators and changed the way their leadership process turned out.
DeleteHItler and Mussolini were both fascist leaders who rose to power by capitalizing on the unrest of the people within their nations. Both leaders were able to amass a large following based on their abilities in public speaking and their grand promises of a better future for their respective nations, however neither leader was able to act on these statements. While Hitler and Mussolini were similar in political policy, they differed greatly in their treatment of religion.
ReplyDeleteHitler and Mussolini both tried to exert total control over the population of their respective countries by taking control of the media, arts, flooding their nations with propaganda, encouraging cult-like support of their leaders. In 1933 the Nazi Party set up a Ministry for Propaganda and by 1939 were controlling 2/3 of all media coverage in Germany. By controlling news, radio, and cinema and filling each with propaganda, Hitler and the Nazis were able to control the German people more easily. While Mussolini did not attempt to take over the press itself, they did control the content of what the newspapers were writing. Fascist propaganda was not nearly as systematic or successful as that of Germany. Similarly, Nazis controlled all art in Germany requiring that all art was subject to Nazi approval. They set restrictions requiring any art to be clear, heroic, and Nazi in character. While this drove many artists from Nazi Germany during this period, it succeeded in tightening the Nazis' grip on the German people. While the Italians also tried to control the art in Italy, their attempts were not nearly as strong, and much more intellectual freedom was allowed in Fascist Italy than in Nazi Germany. This greater toleration of personal expression can be seen as one of the major weaknesses of the fascist regime, eventually contributing to the demise of the fascist party in Italy. While these two leaders were similar in their desire for complete control, they differed in the strength of this control, Hitler ruling with a heavier hand.
The major difference between Hitler and Mussolini was their attitude toward religion. While Mussolini was not a personal fan of religion, he recognized its importance in gaining the support of his largely religious nation. He gave Vatican City to the Catholic church and reinstated religious teaching in schools, guaranteeing that he would receive the support of the church. While Hitler disliked Christianity, he set up a new National church and pretended to agree with the establishment of the church in order to assuage his people. However, in the case of any disagreement with the church, Nazi soldiers arrested and threatened those involved. Mussolini inly introduced anti-Semitic laws to gain the support of Hitler, but beyond banning marriages between Jewish and non-Jewish citizens, he did little that badly affected the Jewish population. Hitler on the other hand, attempted to remove Jews from all aspects of German life. Hitler and Mussolini differed greatly in their dealings with religion, each acting more harshly in their own right toward a different population.
Hitler and Mussolini held similarly traditional views about the role of women in society. The Nazi slogan - ‘kinder, kuche, kirche’ emphasized the importance of women staying at home and focusing on children. While Nazis enforced these beliefs, many German women held similar beliefs about their place, not desiring more, thus the Nazis won the support of women. Similarly, Italians fascists championed the belief that women belonged in the home, and strongly supported separate spheres. Mussolini stated of these beliefs that "war is to men what maternity is to women," further enforcing the idea of gender roles. Hitler and Mussolini were extremely similar in their treatment of women and their beliefs about where in society women belonged.
I think you start out here with a very good beginning paragraph in your comparison of Hitler and Mussolini's exertion of influence in the media. Great examples and good analysis that fits the prompt.
DeleteHowever, after this I feel like you perhaps stopped answering "Compare and contrast the reasons for the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini." and started just comparing aspects of Hitler and Mussolini's social policies. There are elements that are good in the second paragraph, where you are talking about Mussolini allying himself with the church in order to assuage his people, but you don't take the extra step and analyze why this was an important factor leading to his rise to power. Furthermore, other parts such as banning Jewish citizens don't seem to have any connections to factors leading to either leader's rise to power. The third paragraph follows in a similar manner, as I am really not sure that there are even any tangential relations of the position of women to factors that led to Mussolini and Hitler's rise to power. While they are very well researched and argued, I'm afraid your arguments might be an AP US History "ATQ" as they don't address the prompt.
Also I am worried that you might lose organization points for not plotting out a thesis/structure in your introduction and following it in the rest of your paper. You have elements of a thesis in your introduction, but I feel like it might be cleaner/quicker if you consolidated these into a single sentence, perhaps with an opener that gives the historical context for what timeline you are addressing.
For example, a sort of "Before Hitler's appointment as Chancellor/(other event that you think marks end of Hitler's rise to power) and Mussolini's creation of an Italian fascist government/(other event/timeline you think marks Mussolini's gain of power) several crucial factors/strategies allowed these leaders to gain control over Germany and Italy. While both leaders obtained power through (factor) and (factor), they differed greatly in their utilization of (factor)."
Obviously this structure is one of many possible structures, but I think it might fit your purpose in quickly establishing the historical context in which you are writing and giving you a structure/order in which to put your points. Overall this is a very well written and supported argument, you just need to mold it so that it better fits the given prompt. :)
Mussolini and Hitler were arguably the most powerful leaders the world has ever seen. They obtained their power in both similar yet different methods at times when their countries were at low points. During the 1930's was when both dictators gained their power which allowed them the opportunity to take control over their entire countries. This was a time when both the government's of Italy and Germany were facing various obstacles and weaknesses especially after the destruction of WWI. In obtaining their power, differences and similarities can be seen in their ideologies, their methodologies and their political policies.
ReplyDeleteAs an introductory paragraph, it might be helpful to give specific examples or types (political, economic, social, ect.) of the similar of differing ideologies and methodologies so there is something to build off of in the actual paper. What were some of the obstacles and weaknesses that the Italian and German governments were facing at the time? That might also aid your comparison in the paper by looking at similar or non-similar situations they had to face.
DeleteHitler and Mussolini rose to be two of the greatest and most powerful leaders that the world has ever seen. There are specific circumstances in their personality and the way their countries were when they came to power which helped them to become the powerful leaders that they were. There will also some differences in how they came to power as well. The similarities were that both of their countries were failing from the great depression so both countries were hungry for a leader that was going to hopefully save them from the depression. To gain the trust of their countries both leaders used social means and their personalities to imprint visions of a great future and a time without depression into the people of Germany and Italy.
ReplyDeleteTim, I think this introductory paragraph is pretty good, but there are some things that you could have done to improve it. I see that you mention that there were "some differences in how they came to power," which would take care of the contrast aspect of the question. Unfortunately, however, you expanded only on the similarity comparison in this paragraph. Stating that external situations as well as their policies and methods contributed to their rise to power, but this could have been stronger if you were able to provide more specific examples. To make the essay even more coherent, you should place some more emphasis on the dissimilarities between Hitler and Mussolini's ascents to leadership.
DeleteJibin, this critique of my intro paragraph has made me see things that I should have done better in the paragraph. At first I thought that I didn't want to get too specific with examples because of the fact that it is an into paragraph but looking back giving a couple examples here and there could have helped my argument right off the bat.I also could have used some more dissimilarities between Hitler and Mussolini in the into paragraph to prepare readers for what I have to say about their dissimilarities in the actual essay.
DeleteThere have been many dictators in the history of the world and they rise for many reasons. But it is often thought that dictators rise through violent means and never from non-violent means. Two dictators that are often thought of when the word dictator is mentioned are Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. Both are known for their violent ways and both rose in similar conditions. Both Hitler and Mussolini rose from a political party that were voted into office and then solidified dictatorship, both gradually changed or added rules to their political philosophy to increase power, but Hitler offered a more complete rewind to the greatness of Germany as opposed to Mussolini's.
ReplyDelete* Compare promises of the great nation.
* Elaborate on philosophies
* Elaborate on inherit opposite nature of the two political philosophies.
I think you have a good basic idea of how they rose to power and the views of the leaders, but it is very vague. I would include more specific details to show a more clear comparison of the two dictators. In your intro you could include more specific topics to mention that you will talk about in your paper. One question that you could address is: How did both leaders rise to the top to rule their country and what did they do to maintain their power?
DeleteMussolini and Hitler's rise to power were largely due the crisis of vulnerability that both of their respective countries were experiencing at the time. The populations of both Italy and Germany were frustrated with their government which was seen as ineffective. At the time, Italy protested that they’re government was being useless and that they were ready for a new government. The Fascist party, which was quite popular at the time, was going to promote itself and force it’s ideology as the new government for Italy by the infamous event called ‘The March of Rome’. As an act by the king of Italy to avoid a civil war, or any conflict that might’ve started, he decided to appoint Mussolini as the Prime Minister of Italy. It was here Mussolini began to openly take power. Hitler and Mussolini became so powerful was, because they had full, unconditional support of the people. One factor that helped Mussolini alongside his popularity with the Italian people during his rise to power was his alliance with the Vatican. As Mussolini very much knew that the Vatican had a huge impact in Italy, he sought it as best to have the Vatican on his side, as assurance of a large population who were quite religious. heir techniques as shown, for rising to power were largely different. Mussolini used force, and alliance with The Vatican to get himself to ‘Il Duce’. Meanwhile, Hitler worked his way up from the inside
ReplyDeleteThinh,
DeleteI think you did a really great job comparing and contrasting the two leaders. The only thing I would recommend would be more specificity. That would really add to your argument. I think if you mentioned how World War II added to the campaigns of the two leaders, your argument would be really strong
-Caesaré
Thanks. In March 1919, Mussolini formed the Fascist Party, galvanising the support of many unemployed war veterans. He organised them into armed squads known as Black Shirts, who terrorised their political opponents. In 1921, the Fascist Party was invited to join the coalition government.
DeleteBy October 1922, Italy seemed to be slipping into political chaos. The Black Shirts marched on Rome and Mussolini presented himself as the only man capable of restoring order. King Victor Emmanuel invited Mussolini to form a government. Mussolini gradually dismantled the institutions of democratic government and in 1925 made himself dictator, taking the title 'Il Duce'. Hitler, in 1919, joined the fascist German Workers' Party (DAP). He played to the resentments of right-wingers, promising extremist 'remedies' to Germany's post-war problems which he and many others blamed on Jews and Bolsheviks. By 1921 he was the unquestioned leader of what was now the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP or Nazi Party).
In 1923, Hitler attempted an unsuccessful armed uprising in Munich and was imprisoned for nine months, during which time he dictated his book 'Mein Kampf' outlining his political ideology. On his release he began to rebuild the Nazi Party and used new techniques of mass communication, backed up with violence, to get his message across. Against a background of economic depression and political turmoil, the Nazis grew stronger and in the 1932 elections became the largest party in the German parliament. In January 1933, Hitler became chancellor of a coalition government. He quickly took dictatorial powers.
"Hitler: Phenomenon and Portent." Global. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2014. .
Both Benito Mussolini (in power in Italy between 1922- 43) and Adolf Hitler (in power in Germany between 1933-45) were fascist leaders who were able to rise to power and establish single party states during the interwar period by exploiting feelings of national discontentment following the Versailles settlement. They also made use of the Great Depression during the 1930's to provide solutions and gain the support of the majority of the people. As rulers who had received widespread support based on their ability to express grand visions of future glory for their respective Italy and Germany, both Mussolini and Hitler relied upon social policy as a means of trying to impose their fascist ideologies on the population and to maintain support for their regimes while marginalizing opposition to fascist rule. While at the start, Hitler created his form of fascism off of Mussolini's, in the end, Mussolini began to follow the steps set in place by Hitler.
ReplyDelete-State's views on religion. Antisemitism and the extent to which they were used.
-Use of media/ the arts
-Influence of youth through control in the educational system
Great start, and good use of supporting facts, but I think you should link your supporting facts to your introduction. In the introduction you talk about national discontentment, the Great Depression, social policy, and Hitler using Mussolini's form of fascism, but you show different ideas in the outline. You should include all of the ideas you are going to talk about in your introduction. Other than that, your arguments are solid, I just think you should clarify what the connection between the ideas you put in your outline and Hitler and Mussolini's rise to power is. Also, what role did the states' views on religion play in the leaders' rise to power?
DeleteNational Discontentment caused by the Great Depression: Includes the interwar period when both states were forced to pay reparations and their global status was reduced. They used this by creating policies of hope, which attracted the views of many religions.
DeleteSocial Policy: Gained control of society by making positive changes that bettered the lives of the people. They did this through improving the economy, although Mussolini was not able to restore the economy like Hitler did. This in turn allowed room for Hitler and Mussolini to manipulate social media and the arts (more so in Germany) so they could have more control over the people they were dictating.
How Mussolini's Fascism was the role model that turned into the follower of Hitler's fascism: Antisemitism was much more prominent in Germany, and then began to become more influential in Italy, showing Mussolini began to look to Hitler for how to run Italy.
Citation:
"The Differences between the Fascist Economies of Italy and Germany." The Differences between the Fascist Economies of Italy and Germany | South African History Online. South African History Online, n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.
Through nationalistic and imperialistic motivations, Hitler and Mussolini came to power in Germany and Italy around the 1930s.Hitler and Mussolini made use of the great depression during this time to rise to power. At that time German economy was crushed and Italy was also affected but after a year or so, since their economy did not depend on the global economy. Both were able to come up with solutions to aid the economy and thus attracting the commoners to vote for them and support them in order to fight off the depressions plaguing their nations.Though they did have similar goals, Mussolini and Hitler both want to be powerful and controlling, Mussolini wanted to be superior while Hitler wanted to dominate Europe which is also a form of superiority. Their rise to power also scared the French, they were in fear that Fascist powers were becoming too strong, yet they were more fearful of communism spreading which allowed Mussolini and Hitler to abuse that fact and fool France and England. Hitler’s purposes derived mainly from the effects of the 1st world war and theTreaty of Versailles. These influenced the nationalistic intentions of Hitler before and during his reign.taly’s dissatisfaction with the Treaty of Versailles also led Mussolini to rise and rebel since the previous governments were restricted. Mussolini was the “father of Fascism”, he was the one who created it and wrote the “Doctrine of Fascism” before Hitler. Mussolini also had goals that he wanted to achieve when he took over. His rise to power process took some time and wasn’t as easy as Hitler’s rise.
ReplyDeleteHitler and Mussolini both established single party states in their respective countries, Germany and Italy, by gaining control from the incumbent regimes present in those countries. In both cases, the incumbent governments were ineffective and unpopular, and the countries were suffering financial difficulties as a result of the First World War. Hitler and Mussolini promised a strong state and an end to economic problems, which greatly contributed to their popularity and allowed them to gain power. However, Hitler greatly endorsed antisemitism and racial superiority of Aryans, while Mussolini did not utilize racial hatred in his attempts to gain power. Although Hitler's and Mussolini's rise to power occurred during political and economic strife, Hitler used racial hatred to a much larger extent than Mussolini in order to establish his power.
ReplyDeleteSimilarities between Hitler's and Mussolini's rise to power:
- Weak, unpopular incumbent governments
- Economic strife due to World War I
Differences between Hitler's and Mussolini's rise to power:
- Hitler encouraged antisemitism and racial hatred.
- Mussolini did not call for antisemitism, at least until he felt he needed to do so in order to remain allied with Germany
I think that you did a really good job of comparing and contrasting the general points of why the two leaders were similar and how they differed, however i think it might help to see a more specific explanation of certain things. What were the previous countries doing that made them ineffective and unpopular and then how did Hitler and Mussolinis response to their previous government influence their rise to power. However i think that for a short response you do a great job of summarizing the key points of Hitler and Mussolini's rise to power.
DeleteHitler and Mussolini were both fascist leaders that ruled Germany and Italy respectively throughout the Second World War. While they became allies, and shared a common ideology, the origins of their rise to power where largely different due to the unique situations in each of their countries, although many parallels can be drawn in comparison each leader’s rise. Both countries came out of World War I in a position set up by the Treaty of Versailles to struggle, however for different reasons. Germany was made to pay reparations for the War, leading to devastation in the economy. While Italy was allied with the Allies, their past relations with Germany and relatively small impact in the war caused them to be treated un-fairly by the treaty setting up a country in which the populace was convinced that the war had been for nothing, leading to a coup and series of ineffective leadership. Another source of the difference between the two is the variance in how they gained their power. Hitler was elected, and promised to, and largely succeeded in improving the German Economy. Mussolini, on the other hand, led his March on Rome, during which King Emmanuel III handed him power. His reason for fascism was to increase Italian nationalism and strengthen the nation. Both leaders also were similar in some skills that aided in their seizure of power. Both were known to be very charismatic and great speakers, able to convince the populace of their position and create a strong nationalistic feeling, of which there are several examples of in both Hitler and Mussolini’s speeches and the reactions of Germans and Italians to them.
ReplyDeleteYour points are strong and your evidence is solid. However, I think you might not have left enough open (or at least, not made it appear as if you have) for further discussion that would occur in the rest of the essay. You instead compare very specific moments and events within their rise to powers. You could instead pull back the argument a little bit to look more generally on the subject (at least within this introduction-like paragraph) and then use this information to fill in the rest of the essay. Are there better manners in which you could argue this for an introduction paragraph? Or were these points just stepping points for your larger arguments?
DeleteBenito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler led two infamous fascist regimes in the 20th century. They have many similarities and differences which led them to the point of a ultimate dictator. Mussolini and Hitler had different early lives. Mussolini was a socialist and worked for socialist media and spent some time in the military while Hitler enlisted in the army and took control of various organizations early through his intellect and charisma. Hitler and Mussolini were also both very talented orators. A major contributing factor to Hitlers rise to power was his speaking abilities and rising to power through legal means while Mussolini rose to power through a means of revolution. Hitler and Mussolini were both jailed but Hitler used the time to write Mein Kampf which resulted in him believing the only way to power was through legal means. The two had similar policies close to the World War period as both were very manipulative and violent. They both forced fascist ideals upon the population leaving very little opposition. Hitler and Mussolini's rise to power was not very similar historically but the ideals they developed through this rise forged two similar dictators.
ReplyDeleteYou included a lot of good examples for each of them, I especially like the parts about their early life. Not many posts included that. One thing I would maybe include is more information about what was happening in the world at the time. Maybe include some more information comparing the two countries or other specifics about the aftermath of the war. One question I have is who's early life was more effective in helping them rise to power?
DeleteThank you Charlie for the constructive criticism! I think Hitler's rise to power was more effective than Mussolini's. The reason for this is because of the intangibles Hitler possessed. He initially joined the army but then he was able to take control of various organizations because of his qualities. The most important qualities he possessed was charisma and a talent of speaking. Mussolini also set himself up to be successful but was not as charismatic as Hitler.
DeleteBefore either Hitler or Mussolini gained power their respective countries were in a large economic depression and the general population of each country was unhappy with their current government. This is what gave them the opportunity to rise to power. Hitler’s rise to power stemmed from his dissatisfaction with the results of the Treaty of Versailles and his desire to make Germany a world power again. In order to gain more power Hitler blamed the communists for all of Germany’s problems and by blaming them for the Reichstag fire he established a fear of communism among the general public. Mussolini was also driven by the dissatisfaction with the Treaty of Versailles and due to the restrictions on the current government in Italy; Mussolini was able to establish his fascist party easily and make himself the dictator. One thing that each of them had in common was that they were able to gain the support of England, France and the United States due to each of their fears of Communism.
ReplyDeleteDue to the severe economic downfall after World War I, both Germany and Italy sought a leadership with the means to correct the economy. At the time, Italy's government was very unstable, with many prime ministers rotating in and out of power within a short amount of time. Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of the Reichstag, which, under the Weimar Republic, was not a superior position of power, until the Enabling Act was passed after the Reichstag fire in Berlin in 1933. This gave Hitler the opportunity to get rid of anyone who stood in the way of his power without military intervention. It can be argued that Hitler and Mussolini both utilized the economic hardships affecting Germany and Italy respectively, as well as poorly structured government and political blunders, during their rise to power.
ReplyDeleteNice response!
DeleteJust to make this response more specific, what were some similarities and differences between Germany and Italy's policy on correcting their economies? Also, it may help to elaborate on the the Enabling Act (origins, purpose, etc...) to show higher knowledge about this topic. How did Mussolini deal with those who stood in the way of his power? What are some similarities and differences between Mussolini and Hitler's approaches to dealing with opposition? I think that finding three main differences of how these rulers rose to power would help organize the rest of this essay!
In comparison, they are both authoritarian rulers, both fostered a Cult of Personality/strong leadership. Both used coercion and terror to control potential opposition. Both used propaganda effectively. Both attempted to reach accommodation with the Church. Education was controlled and Youth movements were established to indoctrinate the young. Leisure activities were also influenced by the government.
ReplyDeleteThey both focused on the economy but the levels of government intervention varied.
In contrast, Hitler’s domestic policies were underpinned by his desire to establish the racially pure Volksgemeinschaft. From 1935 anti-semitic legislation was passed to marginalise the Jews, in Italy Mussolini did not introduce anti-semitic policies until 1937, they were not rigorously applied.
The main contrast was the level of personal power, Hitler and the Nazis were totally dominant whereas in Italy traditional power centres such as the Church and to a lesser extent the monarchy remained influential.
I like your points that you bring up in both the comparison and contrast. However one thing that you could do is expand on some of your ideas. For example talk about how Hitler used propaganda and how Mussolini used propaganda. You could mention the similarities and differences in their methods of utilizing propaganda. Also, I think you should focus more on their rise to power rather than their methods of leadership. Talk about the contrast between Hitler and Mussolini and their ways of gaining power. Other than that, nice job Juan.
DeleteYeah I basically just tried to focus on the main things and did not go too much in depth about the ideas. I did not research their rise to power that much, which i should have but yeah I will research some more on how they rose to power and how they both used propaganda and also how they gained their power, thanks Joe.
DeleteBoth Adolf Hitler (in power in Germany from 1933 - 1945) and Benito Mussolini (in power in Italy between 1922- 43) were known to have the same craving of making their country a respected and powerful nation in the world. They both wanted their countries to be one of the most powerful in Europe. The methods used by these two fascists to earn power have been very comparable. Mussolini wanted Italy to return to the strong power that the Roman Empire once held. Hitler had the main goal of getting Germany out of the darkness that was caused by the loss and debts of the previous war. This essay will examine the similarities and differences between these two leaders, including their goals as leader.
ReplyDeleteComparison: Before the two leaders rose to power, their countries had a weak economy and government. Italy was going through a post-war recession, and Germany through a depression that had occurred after the Treaty of Versailles; both countries were unhappy with the treaty. Both of these crisis left many dead, homeless, hungry, unemployed and without hope. There was great instability in the government; there was no true leader representing the people, this left many citizens scared of a communist revolution. This was the ideal situation for the rise of Hitler and Mussolini, they gave hope to the people that had already lost it; they promised fresh start. Because of the situation and the promises of both leaders, their parties grew great popularity in the countries. They promised to fix and improve the economy, and therefore gained support from the middle class. Both leaders were strongly against communism and were for nationalism. As far as the ideology, both parties were against democracy and communism, and believed in dictatorship.
Contrast: In Germany, Hitler had much greater support and gave people the idea that the country was to be democratic. In contrast, Mussolini only had 35 Fascist deputies in 1921. This difference was largely due to the fact the Hitler had a solid party and program, while Mussolini’s party were changing between left and right wing of the Fascist party. Also Mussolini had more violent tactics to reassure his position, he banned political parties and even murdered those who opposed him, he used the Black shirts, and established secret police all around the country. During his reign there was a mini-reign of terror (1925). Hitler believed in a pure Aryan race and made sure that the country believed in his ideology. Many of his supporters did, therefore his popularity and their sense of nationalism to him and the country were strong. To maintain his popularity, Hitler had the SS and the Gestapo as his reinforcement, he also outlawed other political parties. As far as economic policies, Mussolini dealt with unemployment bt reducing government expenditures, he also charged protective tariffs. He introduced sick pay, paid holidays, and year-end bonuses. He adopted a principle of economic self-sufficiency and had a National council of Corporations which helped him with the economic system. During Hitler’s reign, he provided incentives for productivity which motivated people to work; this meant that jobs were plentiful, however the wages were still low. He also had stilled the Four year Plan .
It seems like you covered most of the large similarities and differences, but I think you should now dig deeper into the methods these two dictators used. In the contrasting section you touched more on the methods Hitler and Mussolini used to enforce their dictatorship, but in the comparison section, I think you could add methods such as: propaganda.
Deleteok thanks :) Hitler maintained power by use of the SS, propaganda, and elimination of opposition. He also gained major support his people by projecting propaganda for his campaign and against others. Mussolini maintained power through fixed elections, secret police, and propagandas.
DeleteBenito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler were two fascist leaders before and during World War II. They quickly rose to power and established single party states during the interwar period. They rallied their nations by proclaiming their discontent for the Treaty of Versailles. They were both rulers who had widespread support because they shared grand visions of future glory for their countries. They used social policy to impose their fascist ideologies on the population and helped to maintain support. However, in neither of Hitler’s or Mussolini’s countries were their aims fully realized or practiced. This essay will analyze the key points of comparison and contrast between their domestic policies, while also evaluating how well each dictator was able to achieve their goals.
ReplyDeleteI. Hitler
a. Racial theory and anti-Semitism
b. Volksgemeinschaft
II. Mussolini
a. Changed fascism from left to right-wing between 1919 and 1921
b. Varied points of view on the nature of Italian fascism, changed because of Mussolini’s needs at the time
i. Left and right
ii. Revolutionary and conservative
iii. Catholic and anti-clerical
c. Broad aim of policy to create a new type of Italian
III. Similarities
a. Encouraged the “cult of youth” to mold the minds of future generations
b. Used propaganda to create more liking for the leader
c. Attempted to control the media
d. Control of the arts/ censorship
Marissa
DeleteYou have everything well structured already. A person who did not know much about either of the leaders would be able to learn the main points of each leader just from this quick outline. Addition to your outline, i think it is important to know how the leaders kept control of the people under a military rule and how they dealt with those who opposed them.
Thanks, Elva. To help clarify, Hitler maintained power by use of the SS, propaganda, and elimination of opposition. Mussolini maintained power through fixed elections, propaganda, secret police, and the establishment of political courts.
DeleteBoth Mousolini and Hitler seemed to come at a time when their furture nation was in need of a strong leader. Although there was opposition to both hitler and mousolini, used a times gruesome tactics to squash their competition and keep the nation in fellowship and constent demand of their leadership. In both cases propaganda aided these leaders, although hitler was a fantastic speaker mousolini did have much of the control of Italian press.
ReplyDeleteWhile both leaders had different ideologies (Hitler's being nazism and mousolini's being facism) both leader seemed to lean towards a totaliterian government. Both also changed government policy in an astounding way.
Simply put these two leaders were more alike than different. Both seeked expansion, an almost totaliterian government, and a complete change in their nations policy. The significant differences between these leaders was their ideology and the way they imposed their message upon the people.
Katie-
DeleteI think that you have the paragraph down for the introductory thesis though, i'm not sure what you are saying you will be contrasting (according to the prompt) in almost like, an outlined format.
Thanks Claire! I think since these two leaders are similar in using propaganda to rise in power I would contrast which form of propaganda they used and its effectiveness. I would also contrast the way in which they used propaganda to maintain their power.
DeleteThe rise of both Hitler and Mussolini were largely able to take root due to the weakened economic and social states of their respective country. Though they proposed many new and radical ideas, it was their charismatic nature that allowed each leader to come into power. Both were great speakers, and strongly supported their ideas with powerful propaganda. This ability to make people believe in what is being said, and promising them a much better life is where these two men gained much public support. Politically, they were killing off those whom opposed their ideals, or whom stood in the way of future goals. Both the Nazi party, and the Italian Fascist Party offered a strong governing body in a time where the country was very weak. The party(s) offered a sense of direction to the people, and often promised to rid the country of undesirable and harmful people. Both Hitler and Mussolini spoke of tremendous nationalism; taking pride in the country as well as unifying its inhabitants was of the utmost importance. Overall through the ability to reach an audience of desperate citizens with promises of a better life, the charismatic and well-spoken nature of both men, as well as the ability to draw people together under one common goal of nationalistic growth and development; both Hitler and Mussolini were able to transform and take supreme control of their respective countries.
ReplyDeleteIn order to strengthen your argument, I would bring up a little bit about their global acceptance, as in whether foreign leaders supported their rise. Also I don't understand why you have a parenthesis around party(s). That's not how you spell parties. But that's just a small note. Lastly, I think you should investigate further how their promises of nationalism helped strengthen their rise to power.
DeleteHitler and Mussolini both represented facist dictatorships that took power in the time before World War II. When they took power all of Europe was in a massive economic depression and in need of leadership they were the ones who took advantage of this need. Both Hitler and Mussolini took power in their countries and then proceeded to eliminate any competition and consolidate their power by any means necessary. Hitler did this, for example, by setting the Reichstag on fire and blaming it on the communists. Both leaders when originally takin power had the full unconditional support of the people of their country, and this made it very easy for them to proclaim dictatorship. However, their main differences come in that Hitler placed more focus and military and his own personal power, whereas Mussolini had focus on religion, and could never gain full power because of the king. So both Hitler and Mussolini gained power in the nations in a time of economic depression, however, the basis of the decisions was different.
ReplyDeleteOverall, your response is well structured and most of the similarities and differences that you present are very relevant and work well to support your idea. I think that it was a good idea when you specifically used Hitler setting Reichstag on fire as an example. I think using some more of these examples could improve your answer (such as Mussolini's March on Rome). Also, I think that if you outlined the differences between Italian and German fascism, it would add to the latter part of your response, as the different types of fascism were different in several aspects and seem to define how they were able to take power.
DeleteThanks for the input on my writing. I agree I think some more specific examples could improve the overall quality and show some more knowledge on the subject. And finally I completely agree with the idea of defining the two, I think that it would be a really strong way to start the response to the prompt.
DeleteHitler and Mussolini’s rises to power were similar in the way that they both had the full support of the people to begin with. Both of these world leaders were very popular among the people; Mussolini in the way that he supported the religious choices of the Italian people, which caused the people to be very attracted to him, and Hitler in the way that he told the German people what they wanted to hear – that he was going to help them out of the economic disaster they were in. Mussolini formed extremist political parties, which helped him gain power and the popular vote among the people. He also made the people believe that he was the best possible candidate to run their country. Hitler made his people believe that they were cheated out by the Treaty of Versailles and that he was the only person that could save them. Both of these leaders had similar rises to power, and they used similar techniques that caused them to be so popular among their countries.
ReplyDeleteYou do a good job starting with the outline in an introductory style format, but I don't see how you are really contrasting the two leaders and how their respective rises to power were different. So that would be something to introduce in an opening paragraph like this and continue on with it throughout the paper.
DeleteHitler and Mussolini's rise to power are extremely similar to each other though their down fall is what separates them. Hitler and Mussolini both rose to power with the basic situations occuring within their governments. They people of the countries were all struggling to find motivation to succeed to to nationalize and they sought the help from a dedicated leader. The leader they needed then ended up being Hitler, and Mussolini. Because they both used their terror to brainwash people, their reigns became long and successful, for most. Many people felt the wrath of these two dicators and this is what led to the differences in their downfalls. Mussolini's downfall came from angry civillians, running him out of the city where as hitler's downfall came about through the second world war and through the liberation of the Holocaust concentration camps, he then killed himself.
ReplyDeleteThe evidence presented in your intro paragraph seems good. It's evident you are contrasting their downfall but make sure to focus more on their rise to power. What specific similarities and differences are you going to focus on concerning both of them rising to power? I would recommend using a little more detail overall but not to much that it would take away from body paragraphs.
DeleteBenito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler were both very powerful leaders in the 20th century. Mussolini’s rise to power was seated in strong propaganda and street violence. After threatening to march on Rome he was offered the premiership, created a single party state, and took on the nickname of “il Duce”. Hitler’s attempted a similar rise to power because he threatened to march on the city of Berlin and attempted a coup. However he was imprisoned for a year and when he emerged he reestablished himself in the National Socialist movement and lead a violent anti Marxist campaign. Hitler was eventually appointed chancellor by the president, however when the president died Hitler took sole power of the country. Although both men started out their campaign for power similarly Mussolini was the only one that ended up seizing it forcefully, Hitler after failing to forcefully seize power waited for the president to appoint him chancellor and took his power from there.
ReplyDeleteYou have really good content and I liked that you didn't just blatantly say these are the similarities and these are the differences but more incorporated them into each other chronologically. However, because you didn't just say these are the similarities and these are the differences it made it a little hard to follow, because at points I didn't know if you were comparing the two or just stating general facts about either leader. I know fixing that issue would be somewhat hard to fix with the way you structured it, but that might be something to think about.
DeleteGood job. I think that you have done a good job on showing how they both attempted a similar rise to power and how their attempts ended up differently. I would go into more detail about the reasons why each leader wanted to rise to power and how that drove them to become the leaders of their single party states.
DeleteThe rise of both Hitler and Mussolini came about at a time when their countries were vulnerable and broken. For them, it was fortunate because they were able to break through as strong leaders with solid ideas and they became the beacon of hope for their failing countries. Both leaders were extremely charismatic and charming which allowed them to easily charm their ways into the hearts of their people. In addition to their charismatic nature, they both relied heavily in propaganda which worked well for them. The extreme advertisement of themselves worked in their favor because people were ready and willing to accept a new leader, let alone one who was ready to lead. Both Hitler and Mussolini offered the country a strong sense of direction and purpose. They were ready to rid the country of its undesired people and bring it back to an amazing country. They both were very outspoken on the topic of nationalism, which to the people of their countries were more than willing to accept. Those who opposed the party ideals were promptly killed, making both leaders look like they had no opposition, which was good for their image. If no one was opposing them, they obviously were doing great things. Through their charismatic nature, propaganda, and the failing state of their countries, Mussolini and Hitler were easily able to take over their respective countries with ease.
ReplyDeleteErin-I really like your intro. I think the main way to strengthen it would be to go into the main proposals they brought to the table that appealed to the broken country (what they said they would do to help).
DeleteBenito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler are the hallmark dictators of the early twentieth century, known for their radical ideals and cunning rule. Both leaders inherited a failing country, in Hitler's case it was an indebted Germany and in Mussolini's case it was an embarrassed Italy. Not only that but both dictators came into the government by election or invitation and then proceeded to uproot the existing government in place of their own. Due to the detrimental circumstances of their countries Hitler and Mussolini had the undying support of their citizens, if only because they offered a small chance at hope, and experienced little opposition from their own countries. However, differences between Hitler and Mussolini are found in their ideology, Hitler's Germany ran under Nazism and Mussolini's Italy embraced Fascism. Also, the two dictators had very different ideas on religion in the country since Mussolini was much less cruel towards other religions in Italy. Therefore, Hitler and Mussolini had very similar rises to power and continued to rule similarly but had a few key differences in ideology.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. Do you think that their regimes were good and necessary for their countries? At what point did they turn into dictators? And when they were, did the public still support them? I like to think that because of Mussolini's cooperation with the church and less violent means he was more popular than Hitler, but Hitler's leadership strategies were unrivaled. I wonder if even when Hitler grew oppressive and mass-genocide-y he still had his original mass support.
DeleteCaesare Tamag
ReplyDeleteCompare and contrast the reasons for the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini.
Comparatively, Mussolini and Hitler came into power at a time when their countries were both weak. They had a weak economy due to the global depression and were able to make promises to help change their countries circumstances. Both countries people blamed their government for the economic problems and Mussolini and Hitler both took the opportunity to come into power while Italians and Germans were weak. They both also constantly reminded their people of how they were wronged in the Treaty of Versailles, which helped Italians and Germans to be united on an issue.
However, Mussolini took different actions to come into power. He got the Vatican behind him as he was getting elected, as the Vatican is very influential in Italy. Getting the religious leaders behind him was a very smart move.
Hitler created his own ideas and was dramatically different from the old government that he seemed like a clear choice for the German people to get behind and support. His drastic changes seemed to hold promises for the German people. His differences in opinions and ideologies helped him to gain huge support from the Germans.
Both of their fascist reigns were different, however they seemed to both have similar rises to power. Mussolini and Hitler were very powerful people in their countries
I really liked your analysis from many different viewpoints from religion, politics, etc. I also like the way you organized this paragraph and the comparisons are clear. You should possibly include some more background information and their upbringing. I think it is also important to mention how talented of a orator Hitler was. I think there are only a few missing elements but this paragraph is a good foundation!
Delete"Thank you for your input on my writing. I think you are right, I could put some more background in to make my argument stronger. Missing Hitler's speaking skills detracts from the paragraph I think. I appreciate you taking the time to read through my paragraph."
DeleteThanks so much,
Caesaré
Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler ended the 20th century as two of the most prominent figures of both World War II and the fascist movement. Both gave rise following World War I and the social discontent that occurred within their respective countries, problems not limited to massive inflation, unemployment, and generally poor economies. While both maintained power and lead their countries in slightly different manners, Mussolini and Hitler both took advantage of their countries' poor economic state and used their skills as orators to reinvigorate national pride into the weakened states. Their ability to capitalize on economic downturn, refocus on national pride, and wrestle power away from the current government allowed the two dictators to come to power.
ReplyDeleteJust Hitler:
Support of bankers
National socialist party
Moderate to extreme
Just Mussolini:
Italian Fascism
Extreme to Extreme
Both:
Nationalistic emphasis
Treaty of Versaille
Weakened economic state
Huge losses in WWI
All of your points are great and I like that you're not necessarily using the usual reasons why Hitler and Mussolini are different. The one thing that I would do to make your Hitler and Mussolini paragraphs more balanced is add one more point to the Mussolini one, that way you don't have one uncountered point for why Hitler is different from Mussolini.
DeleteThat is a very valid point, I often struggle with that. I don't know if I necessarily need a 'counter point' as it's not really a 'which is better' kind of question, but I think that it might make a moderator question my knowledge of Mussolini. So that might be a reason to add it instead
DeleteHitler and Mussolini were both authoritarian rulers. They both had strong followers and opposition, mainly due to both good leadership and fear-factor. They used terror techniques to control their followers and opposition alike, by creating an example of those that disobeyed the regime. Both used violent demonstrations, legislation, control over economy, control over the next generation's education, control over organized religion, control over public meetings, propaganda and varying degrees of oppression to keep their followers and opposition in check.
ReplyDeleteHitler’s policies displayed the violent acts to a greater degree than Mussolini's. Hitler was very imperialist and opinionated. He enforced his desire to purify the German race on Germany and any other countries he could capture with his power. He took this goal to the oppressive ends of concentration camps and mass genocide. Mussolini's actions may have also been anti-Semitic, but much less severe than that of Hitler's. Because of these ends, the Nazis were totally dominant in their empire whereas the Italian churches and government worked in tandem to control the country. Because of this, Mussolini's regime showed less of a gap between followers and opposition than Hitler's.
This was a good introduction, but make sure you include your three points. Make sure you also go into possible reasons for the differences and similarities between the two leaders. Go into more depth about the rise to power, not just their policies during their rule.
DeleteAdolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini were both fascist leaders of Germany and Italy. They came to power towards the end of World War 1 and the inter war period. Both were trying to be the leader that their countries needed, because both were war torn and suffering from poverty. Both leaders were trying to free their country from the great depression and the state that the Treaty of Versailles left them in. For Germany, they were forced to pay reparations for the war, leaving them with economic difficulties. While in Italy, the treaty caused disadvantages because they were not heavily involved in the war. Because both countries were in dire need for a strong leader, this was a good time for Hitler and Mussolini to jump into the spotlight. They were known for their cult of personality, whereas Hitler spoke publically and Mussolini used propaganda. Hitler was elected by the people of Germany, while Mussolini led his March on Rome and King Emmanuel III gave him power. Both seeked expansion of their countries and totalitarian government. Their drive was for a complete change in their nation’s policy. The difference between them was their ideology (Hitler being in favor of Nazism/fascism and Mussolini in favor of fascism) and how they got their messages to their people. While their rises to power might have been similar, their rule over their countries once they were in power was very different.
ReplyDeleteYou make some really good points but I think a little bit more organization would be beneficial; try to break up a little more to present your similarities first and then the difference, you go back and forth a little too often. Otherwise, I liked the concluding sentence which summarized your paragraph very nicely, I would just add maybe one more sentence giving a little insight into the difference between Mussolini's fascism and Hitler's Nazism as it was also a form a fascism.
DeleteThank you! I will be sure to do that. I would organize the intro paragraph better and make it more fitting to the structure of the essay. First, I would talk about the similarities of Hitler and Mussolini in one paragraph. Then, I would have separate paragraphs describing the differences in their regimes; one for Hitler and one for Mussolini.
DeleteHitler and Mussolini both came to power during the early 20th century and established fascist dictatorships in Germany and Italy respectively.
ReplyDeleteMussolini came to power after he returned from World War II to find his country, Italy, in a state of political and economic chaos. Inflation was very high, around 500%, and unemployment rates were very high as well. Italians were extremely unhappy with the state of their country, and were also dissatisfied with their settlement in the treaty of Versailles, in which Italy had not gotten the land that they had hoped to get. Like Mussolini, many soldiers were returning home from war, but they weren’t able to get jobs. With the rise of Communism in Russia, people were afraid of a communist revolution, especially considering how weak the government of Italy was. No political party commanded a majority, and the overall structure of the government was disorganized and lacked power over the people. Mussolini formed a fascist party in Italy in 1919 to oppose the socialist party, which he had left, and it was his opposition of communism that allowed him to gain a large base of support from the people of Italy. Overall, Mussolini was able to come to power because of weak governments in Italy and the economic depression that struck Italy post-world war I.
Hitler came to power because of many of the same reasons as Mussolini. Germany was under the Weimar Constitution, and the Weimar government of Germany was weak. Because of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany faced huge debts due to the reparations they owed other countries. The United States had been lending massive amounts of money to Germany in the from of loans, but after the Stock Market Crash, the US stopped giving loans to Germany and asked for them to repay their loans. This caused a massive unemployment rate in Germany. Germany then went through a series of chancellors who were unable to deal with Germany’s worsening economic difficulties. Hitler saw this as an opportunity for him to form his own single party state and played off the pre-existing anti-Semitism present in Germany in order to gain power.
Wow Mac, this is very good. Overall you had very good structure, and also I thought you have really good points on both of them but I think you should contrast them both a little more, how were they different? I like the introduction, it's was really sorry and specific, good explanations on bot Hitler and Mussolini. You had good explanations on how they rose to power and their policies. Nice job Mac.
DeleteSource: Gordon, Irving L.. "World Wars and Dictatorships in a Troubled World." World history. 2nd ed. New York: Amsco School Publications, 1982. 40 - 471, 477-479. Print.
ReplyDelete