'the Usa Was Hit by the Great Depression in 1929 Because of Increasing Restrictions on International Trade.' How Far Do You Agree with This Opinion? Use Sources 7, 8 and 9 and Your Own Knowledge.

In: Historical Events

Submitted By ddiimmaa123
Words 1896
Pages 8
'The USA was hit by the Great Depression in 1929 because of increasing restrictions on international trade.' How far do you agree with this opinion? Use Sources 7, 8 and 9 and your own knowledge.

The USA was hit by the Great Depression in 1929 because of increasing restrictions on international trade to a small extent, as it was indeed a significant factor in creating the onset of the Great Depression, as it acted as one of the long-term problems with the US economic system. Source 7 supports this argument, and suggests that it made world trade more difficult as it led to the USA not being able to 'expand its foreign markets as rapidly as its production'. However, other factors could also be considered to have started the Great Depression more significantly, with source 8 suggesting that it was due to long-term problems in the economy associated with a lack of purchasing power and the effects of the Wall Street Crash, along with source 9 demonstrating that it was due to the laissez-faire policies pursued by the Coolidge administration.

The USA was arguably hit by the Great Depression in 1929 because of the combination of under consumption and overproduction linked to the maldistribution of wealth in US society during the 1920s. The problem with under consumption was mainly due to the fact that a substantial segment of the population that was farmers and workers in declining industries had not shared in the general prosperity of the early 1920s. In 1929, American farmers annual income averaged at $273, whilst the national average was $750, demonstrating the significant lack of purchasing power they had. This was a problem before the onset of the Great Depression as farmers debts were also increasing significantly due to new machinery, going from $3.4 billion in 1910 to $8.4 billion in 1920, with the value of farmland also dropping 30% from 1920 to 1928,…...

Similar Documents

Using Sources K to N, and Your Own Knowledge, How Far Do You Accept the View of Source K That It Was American Foreign Policy That ‘Crystallized the Cold War’?

...Using Sources K to N, and your own knowledge, how far do you accept the view of Source K that it was American foreign policy that ‘crystallized the Cold War’? The emergence of the Cold War can, to some extent be seen as a result of American Foreign policy – as it merely intensified previous tensions and distrust within the two superpowers. However, the ‘crystallization’ of the Cold War can also be seen as being due to several other factors such as the individuals’ personalities, the power vacuum that emerged at the end of WWII and the fundamental clash of ideologies all, to a certain degree, combined to cause the emergence of the Cold War, (the factors are all interlinked with one another). Firstly, it can be considered (at least to some degree) that the emergence and ‘crystallization’ of the Cold War was due to American foreign policy, as source K stresses the importance of US foreign policy as a contributory factor as America were keen to preserve their economic interests and to maintain political control – it says that ‘the US [employed] its new and awesome power’, meaning that tension would be caused inevitably, as the Soviets did not want to see the Americans gaining too much influence. An examples of foreign policies launched by the US that were designed to help the European markets (to retain the Open-door policy) is the Marshall Plan, introduced in 1947, it was a programme designed to offer financial aid to countries that were economically damaged in the second......

Words: 336 - Pages: 2

How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War Between the Usa and the Soviet Union in the Years 1945-53 Was Primarily Due to Traditional Great Power Rivalry?

...How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War between the USA and the Soviet Union in the years 1945-53 was primarily due to traditional great power rivalry? The development of the Cold War can be viewed as being caused for several different reasons. The great power rivalry, ideological differences and personality traits cited as the main causes for the war, but ideology and personality also contain flaws that prove the great power rivalry was the primary cause. The main argument for the development of the Cold War is that it was created by the traditional great power rivalry. Source 7 argues Russia was the “most ruthless of world-conquering ideologies.” Added to by another point in Source 7 that contests Russia suffered from insecurity “who saw ‘security’ only in the total destruction of rival power.” Both of these points proving Russia were determined to destroy their rivals and can be viewed as a dangerous force when faced with opposition. This is supported by Source 7 where it claims “the USA would have to ‘contain’ its pressure by uncompromising resistance, even if Russia had not been communist” This point arguing ideology was irrelevant to the start of the Cold War, also shown by Source 8 where it claims “Leaders and citizens saw their countries acting for much broader purposes than the mere advancement of national interests.” However, the great power rivalry was even more apparent in conferences towards the end of......

Words: 414 - Pages: 2

Use Source T, U and V and Your Own Knowledge. Do You Agree with the View in Source V That Wolsey's Domestic Policis Were Disappointing?

...Use source T, U and V and your own knowledge. Do you accept the view in source V that Wolsey’s domestic policies were disappointing? Thomas Wolsey was Henry VIII chief minister from his rise to power in 1514 after working himself up until his eventual fall from the king’s favour in 1529. During the time period where Wolsey contained his power he made many changes to England’s domestic policies. For this reason I do not accept the view of source V that Wolsey’s domestic policies were completely disappointing, this essay will show my debates as to why I believe that Wolsey’s domestic policies were not so unsatisfactory. Wolsey’s domestic policies were not all so disappointing especially when you associate them with the poor, this being because he created the Star Chamber. The Star Chamber emphasized his success of domestic policies due to the fact it gave him more popularity with the laity, the Star Chamber was a court that anyone could bring their case to, meaning the poor had the opportunity for justice, this is one reason why the policies were not disappointing. Another reason why this was a success was that Wolsey dealt with hundred and twenty cases each year which is ten times as much as Henry VII the year before. This is clearly a great success and definitely not a disappointment with the poor proportion of the county. Source U supports this point due to the fact it states ‘He favours the people exceedingly…. Hearing their cases and seeking to dispatch them instantly...

Words: 1416 - Pages: 6

Stalin the Red Tsar. How Far Do You Agree with This Judgement?

...Stalin the Red Tsar. How far do you agree with this judgement? Stalin, upon his rise to power in 1929, assured the Russian peoples that he was a dedicated follower of Leninism; often saying that “Lenin is always with us” indicating that he wished to show how similar to Lenin he was going to be in his leadership. Despite this claim, in actual fact there were a number of distinctly Tsarist elements to his leadership. A Tsar is a leader who rules without parliaments in an absolute autocracy, often being resistant to any reforms; maintaining the feudal, peasant-based illiterate society. Furthermore, they were often intrinsically bound with the Russian Orthodox Church as well as being distinctively imperialistic and chauvinistic. To a large degree, Stalin fitted this model, perhaps most notably due to his “top-down” approach to leadership, thus leading to the idea that he was a “Red Tsar”. He did not fit the model fully, though, especially when it came to being anti-reform, where in fact Stalin was all for reform (though not always for the better) and believed in modernising the USSR and, despite his anti-Western stance, was a Westerniser and not a Slavophile. He was also not imperialistic like the Tsarist leaders had been, and knew that people would react badly to Russian cultural imperialism. The belief that Stalin was a Red Tsar perhaps also came from his self-portrayal as a ‘God-like’ figure, and his employment of very traditional tactics of fear and propaganda in his......

Words: 1613 - Pages: 7

Use Sources 1, 2 and 3 and Your Own Knowledge. Do You Agree with the View That the 1950s Can Be Seen as a Period of Great Prosperity for the People of Britain? Explain Your Answers Using Sources 1, 2 and 3 and Your Own Knowledge. (40 Marks)

...In my opinion, the 1950s cannot be seen as a period of prosperity for the people of Britain for a number of reasons which I will explain further on. I believe that source 1 mainly agrees with the above statement, however, there are some areas in the source which can display ways in which the source doesn’t fully agree with the above statements. Source 2 also, somewhat agrees with the above question, however, there are a greater number of aspects of the question which can imply that the statement is not 100% true. Source 3 is the source which mostly disagrees with the above question for a number of reasons. I believe that the 1950s were not years of great prosperity for the people in Britain for a number of reasons. Firstly, although source 1 states that the British people ‘have never had it so good’ it can be interpreted that this account could be considered as being somewhat biased as it is a speech made by Prime Minister Harold Macmillan in July 1957 during a Conservative Party rally in Bedford which means that all that is said in the rally is to ensure that all the supporters of the party are pleased with the progress that is being made. As it is a speech made at the rally of the party that implemented policies in order for this situation to happen they would only discuss the positives of their policies and only talk about the benefits it has for people, it would not discuss the limitations or the negative impact it may have had on the lives of some. The use of the......

Words: 1187 - Pages: 5

“the Main Source of Jane Eyre’s Interest Is the Story of Immense Human Endurance” How Far Do You Agree with This Statement

...“The main source of Jane Eyre’s interest is the story of immense human endurance” How far do you agree with this statement (Explore the methods which Charlotte Bronte uses to present the idea of human endurance) Jane as narrator certainly shares with the reader a story of immense human endurance. We see this throughout the whole novel. Early example of such are in the Gateshead section of the novel where Jane endures a lack /absence of love. She is forced to endure physical and verbal cruelty though the actions of the cousin John Reed. Who taunts her about her social class and lack of money, ‘You have no business to take our books; you are a dependent, mamma says; you have no money; your father left you none; you out to beg, and not to live here with gentlemen’s children like us..’ Jane endures physical cruelty when John flung the book at Jane, striking her on the head. Through the red room we are able to see the symbolism of Jane’s entrapment, isolation and desire to break free. There is also an element of foreshadowing and imagery emphasises on how isolated Jane is from the rest of her peers “dark and haunted chamber” Even at Lowood this is a recurring theme of the unjust and sufferable nature of her childhood. The endurance from the Red Room is a symbol of her isolation from compassion during her childhood. Through the repeated use of this symbol we see how Jane is imprisoned by her own treatment. Following Jane’s escape from the Red Room we see that she...

Words: 939 - Pages: 4

How Far Do You Agree That the Impact of the First World War Was Beneficial to the Economy and Society of the Usa?

...How far do you agree that the Impact of the First World War was beneficial to the economy and society of the USA? At the start of the First World War the US economy was beginning to develop at a rapid pace and by the end of the war it was in an even stronger position this was due to impacts of the First World War such as an increase in industrial production, low rates of unemployment and improving living standards. However it can also be argued that the First World War damaged the US economy as the level of national debt went up and there was a brief recession during the years 1920-1921. The First World War also had an impact on society for example women in society changed dramatically and the 1920’s saw the birth of ‘The new Woman’. Although during the 1920’s, some freedoms were expanded others were curtailed such as prohibition which banned the sale of alcoholic drinks this had both negative and positive impacts on society in America. It can be argued that the impact of the First World War was beneficial to the economy, one reason for this is that industrial production increased between 1916 and 1918 by 39 per cent. This was due to the huge demand for war materials, imports from Europe fell and exports from the USA rose which lead to an increase in industrial production. In 1913 the USA produced about 32 per cent of the world’s industrial goods. The USA needed to import very little and most of what it produced could be sold to its rapidly growing population. Steel output...

Words: 1512 - Pages: 7

How Far Do You Agree That the Most Important Cause of the Revolution in February 1917 Was the Great War

...AS History How far do you agree that the most important cause of the revolution in February 1917 was the Great War? The February revolution which occurred in 1917 was the result of several causes, one of which being World War 1; in my opinion, it was the most important trigger. The Great War was the cause of Russia becoming financially dependent on Britain and France, decreasing the prestige the Tsar once held. Russia was unable to sustain its wealth due to the extreme costs the War brought: Anger rose within the people and with 85% of the army containing surfs that were losing their loyalty towards the Tsar, a revolution was inevitable. The war encouraged the breakdown of the autocratic way of ruling, but Tsar Nicholas was unqualified to lead the army anyhow, and was ill suited as Commander-In-Chief. This did not aid the Brusilov Offensive in any way; the result was the failure of the attack in August 1916: With the Russian forces deserting from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, the loyalty towards the Tsar was largely affected and reduced. The morale further diminished as during December 1916, the railways were unable to commit to their desired function, which lead to a shortage of military equipment. These transportation failures halted vital supplies reaching the battle areas. The major shortage of military equipment led to the Russian artillery units limiting to firing 3 shells per day – which had an enormous impact on the Russian......

Words: 1320 - Pages: 6

How Far Do You Agree the Sources Suggest That Attlee Was Not a Very Effective Political Leader?

...How far do you agree the sources suggest that Attlee was not a very effective political leader? To a certain extent Sources 1, 2 and 3 all show evidence that would agree with the statement that Attlee was not a very effective political leader. For example all 3 sources suggest that he lacked authority and power, some of the qualities that would produce a great leader. Both sources 1 and 2 describe Attlee as a ‘small’, ‘shy’ man, giving off the impression that Attlee was a very timid character, not capable of running a country and unable to hold a position of power. Source 1 was written by a supporter of Attlee opponents, so may be untrustworthy, as Kingsley Martin opposed Attlee. Although source 2 was written by a left-of-centre newspaper, adding credibility to the source as the criticisms where from a supporter of Attlee. Meaning that the evidence was not be over exaggerated. However the source was written the day after Attlee resigned meaning that the source could be seen as over-generous, as it is looking back over Attlee’s ruling. Both sources 1 and 3 describe Attlee as a school master who is able to ‘restore order’, but ‘did not teach very much’ this displays that Attlee was unable to change or offer opinion. This reinforces the statement that Attlee was not an effective leader. Source 3 also states that Attlee’s summing-up in meetings was often incomplete and he barely produced constructive ideas. This further suggests that Attlee was there to listen, but not to give......

Words: 669 - Pages: 3

‘the Reichstag Fire Was More Important Than the Night of the Long Knives for Hitler’ How Far Do You Agree with This Statement? Explain Your Answer.

...‘The Reichstag fire was more important than the Night of the Long Knives for Hitler’ How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.  (10)  Both the Reichstag Fire and the Knight of the Long Knives were of great importance to Hitler in hi journey towards his consolidation of power. Whereas one can be seen as the straw on the camels back to Hitler's consolidation, the other can be seen as the framework towards the final triumph. The Reichstag Fire was an important turning point in Hitler’s consolidation of power. This incident brought the Nazis many advantages and some disadvantages. When the police managed to enter the building they found a man named Marinus Van Der Lubbe, who was a Dutch communist. The fact that he was a communist enabled Hitler to use this against the communists and have 4,000 communist leaders imprisoned days before the elections. During this period of terror for Germany the police could do anything, more specifically the Nazi police. Hitler made the most out of this situation; he used the police to intimidate voters and to disrupt communist party meetings. The fact that a communist was found burning the Reichstag building made all of this possible for Hitler, although it has been argued that the Nazis might have started the fire and that Van Der Lubbe was framed for the crime. Shortly afterwards Van Der Lubbe was tried and executed. In addition, it allowed Hitler to persuade Hindenburg to pass the “Enabling Act”, which suspended......

Words: 940 - Pages: 4

How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Years 1945-8 Owed More to Soviet Expansionism Than to Usas Economic Interests?

...How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War in the years 1945-8 owed more to Soviet expansionism than to USA’s economic interests? My opinion is that the development of the Cold War was due to Soviet expansionism rather than the USA’s economic interests in the years 1945-48. The Sources all present to some extent the idea that Soviet expansionism was to blame. Source 7 argues Soviet expansionism as the most important factor as it claims that the USSR were ‘seeking to expand its influence into Western Europe’ and so causing Western Attitudes to increasingly worsen. However there is still evidence in the sources to support the view that the USA’s economic interests owed more to the development of the Cold War in the years 1945-48. For example in source 8 it suggests that the USA wanted a war with the USSR to help its economy, emphasising the impact of Truman’s ‘military industrial complex’ on aggressive foreign policy which played a huge role in the development of the Cold War. Furthermore it can be argued that it was the misunderstanding and confusion, caused by fear and suspicion, between the two nations which owed more to the development of the Cold War in the years 1945-8. Soviet Expansionism played a huge role in the development of the Cold War in the years 1945-8. Evidence to support this view is found in source 7 which claims that although in 1945 the West had accepted the Soviet’s influence in Eastern Europe; the West became suspicious......

Words: 1013 - Pages: 5

Use the Sources Below and Your Own Knowledge to Explain How Far You Would Agree with the Statement That the Cold War Developed in the Years 1945 to 1953 Primarily Due to the Role of Individual Leaders?

...Q) Use the sources below and your own knowledge to explain how far you would agree with the statement that the cold war developed in the years 1945 to 1953 primarily due to the role of individual leaders? The term ‘Cold War’ refers to the period of struggle and conflict between the USA and USSR between 1945-1991. Each of the Superpowers saw the other as a threat to its continued survival and adopted strategies to preserve their positions. The two Superpowers never went to war directly with each other in this period, but became involved in conflicts such as the Korean War where each side stood behind the other nations involved. This statement suggests that the ever-increasing hostility between the USA and USSR during this time period was due to actions from Truman and Stalin respectively. I agree with this statement to a certain extent, however, there are certain flaws with this statement, in that it was not wholly the fault of the two leaders as individuals but more due to certain events and the manor of poor cooperation with which the dealt with them. Two factors in favor of this statement are the beliefs and attitudes of Stalin and Truman. Stalin’s fear of the USA led him to believe that the USSR needed a barrier of territory between Soviet territory and the USA’s allies in Western Europe. Stalin feared another anti-communist invasion of Russia from Europe as had occurred in 1918 and 1941. Stalin wanted to create a barrier against the West, a barrier made up of......

Words: 1558 - Pages: 7

How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Years 1945-49 Was Mainly Due to ‘Stalin’s Own Errors’?

...How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War in the years 1945-49 was mainly due to ‘Stalin’s own errors’? I disagree with the statement - sources 7, 8 and 9 all suggest that the Cold War had many contributing factors, although it was ultimately the USA’s own economic and national interests to blame, rather than Stalin’s errors, as a result of acts and policies such as the Marshall Plan and Truman Doctrine in 1947. Both providing evidence to support this view are sources 8 and 9, with source 7 giving the impression that it was the errors of Stalin that contributed most. In addition to these two factors, conflicting ideologies also played a small role in provoking the Cold War, as shown in source 8. Despite this, it was fundamentally the economic and national interests of the USA that was mainly to blame for the start of the Cold War in 1945 and its development through to 1949. Europe was destroyed physically and economically after the Second World War. America saw this as a chance to become a world hegemony, as well as economically advancing the nation - source 9 proves this, saying, “The liberal capitalist US economy needed ever-increasing trade and investment opportunities”, as well as “The Marshall Plan was designed to implant an informal American Empire in Europe”. This shows that the USA not only used Europe’s fragile situation after WW2 to prosper itself, but more importantly increase its world influence, aiming to produce some sort of......

Words: 1496 - Pages: 6

“Hitler Became Chancellor in January 1933 Because He Was the Leader of the Most Popular Party in Germany” – How Far Do You Agree with This Opinion.

...became chancellor in January 1933 because he was the leader of the most popular party in Germany” – How far do you agree with this opinion. Hitler did not become chancellor in January 1933 because he was the leader of the most popular party in Germany, it was however to do with the support of the elite that made him Chancellor. There were other factors also such as the decline of the Weimar Republic and the economy but it was mainly to do with the conservatives. One factor that shows that the support of the elite was the reason that Hitler had become Chancellor was the event of the Bamberg conference. It could be argued that this conference had changed the ideology of the NSDAP and had made it more conservative. In the Bamberg conference, a new autocratic, and centralised structure was discussed, which stressed complete obedience to Hitler and the Fuhrerprinzip, and adherence to the “programme of 1920”. However it could be argued that the main reason why he had won the vote was due to the support of the elite, which includes Gustav Krupp and Hugenburg, who was a media tycoon. These elites had promised Hitler funding and they were against the radical anti-capitalism of Gregor Strasser. This shows how Hitler had become chancellor in 1933 because of the support of the conservatives as without them he may not have been the leader of the nazi party to start with. One argument that would show to some extent it was due to the fact that Hitler’s party was the most popular,......

Words: 936 - Pages: 4

How Far Was the Wall Street Crash the Main Cause for the Great Depression?

...RESEARCH QUESTION: How far was the Wall Street Crash the main cause for the Great Depression? A. Plan of the Investigation 1 B. Summary of Evidence 1 C. Evaluation of Sources 3 D. Analysis 5 E. Conclusion 7 F. Bibliography 8 A. Plan of the investigation The investigation considers the extent to which the Wall Street Crash was the main cause for the Great Depression that hit the Unites States throughout the 1930s, whose effects were spread worldwide. For this purpose the investigation assesses the significance of the crash in the stock market in relation to other factors that were also relevant. Through the selection and summary of relevant written sources, the investigation examines the 1920’s the domestic and international problems during the “prosperous” years that triggered the crisis. In order to reach a conclusion two of the sources: The Great Depression by Lionel Robbins and The Great Depression and The New Deal by Robert F. Himmelberg are evaluated for their origin, purpose, values and limitations. Word count: 120 B. Summary of evidence By the time the United States entered the First World War in 1917, the USA was the world’s biggest economic power[1]. Its role in providing extra equipment and a supply of fresh soldiers was instrumental in the final Allied victory[2]. The artificial prosperity of the war years was followed by an inevitable......

Words: 2701 - Pages: 11