Nazism Vs. Fascism

1. Both Italian Fascism and German Nazism focused on rebuilding the economy and expanding to gain back the land they had lost in the war.
2. Both have supreme rulers who decide what is best for the country.
3. Both have an extreme sense of nationalism.
4. Both have been given the raw end of the stick in accordance to the Versailles treaty.
5. Both leaders were amazing orators and, through a simple nationalistic speech, get you to do anything.

1. I think that Fascism would appeal to younger audiences more because it focuses more upon the political part than the ethical part...like killing jews.
2. Fascism focuses more on nationalism and causes extreme militarism and I think that is the only downfall the Italians might have had with it. Also, this militarism would only hurt the economy because there would be no workers.
3. The eradication of the Jews definitely. I am sure there were many Germans who felt that the Eradication of the jews was unnecessary, but the power of Hitler forced them to quiet themselves.

Fascism Notes

Germany Notes
-No dictator, government was Weimar Republic
-President above chancellor, above Reichstag
-Hitler part of National Socialist Worker Party
-places other nazis into Reichstag
-enough nazis to vote hitler into power as chancellor
-prez dies, hitler takes advantage becomes president/supreme ruler
-Propaganda, censorship of media, history, religion, sports, music
-banned Unions "unequal"
-controls army forms SS
-hitler promotes eradication of jewz
Italy Notes
-Versailles Treaty: italy feels left out from the spoils, get pissed off
-gov loses control over people, people are angry
-Benito Mussolini with Black Shirts march on rome
-King gives Benito Secretary to ensure there is no fighting (backed by Pope duh)
-afraid of civil war
-keeps CAPITALIST ECONOMY

1. After both rulers come into power, Hitler forces people to do what he wants, while Mussolini already has public backing and doesn't need to force them to do anything.
2. Italy keeps Capitalist economy while Germany does not.
3. Italy's economy was ruined from fighting in the war rather from losing it.
4. Hitler used his speeches in order to gain popularity, while Benito used his force in order to gain power.
5. In Germany, Hitler banned religion while in Italy, religion was used to gain power in Mussolini's case

Lenin's Death & Aftermath

Part 1
1. He was the leader of the Bolsheviks and placed them into power.
2. Famine, protests, Civil War, and Epidemics.
3. Both Lenin and Robespierre were radicals, and the deaths of the two pushed their revolutions farther. However, Stalin used Lenin's death as a way of getting into power.
4. I do not think it would have worked. People followed behind Lenin because he was a good speaker and popular, however Stalin and Trotsky might have had the same effect but not to the same degree.
Part 2
1. Lenin is afraid that the two parties will split and that the Central Committee will come crashing down.
2. Lenin believes that Trotsky will become too preoccupied with the Administrative side of his job rather than the theory of Marxism.
3. Lenin thinks that Stalin is powerhungry and believes that the Public will not support him.
4. Lenin was leaning towards Trotsky to become leader of Russia. He continually says that Trotsky was very capable, just a little too obsessed with his work. I would have chosen neither and instead picked Bukharin because Lenin obviously liked how his theories were put together and saw his loyalty. However, he was not a good public speaker.