As R.R. Palmer states, “the peace that is mere absence of war, does not exist in international relations” (Palmer 827). The time period of peace during the twenties and thirties was a brief intermission between the two biggest wars in World history. The peace treaty that was enacted to end WWI was not a permanent fix. It actually was the first step towards the start of the Second World War. There were many events that caused this destructive chain reaction. The Treaty of Versailles caused much resentment in the nations that got the short straw the deal. The depression plus other occurring conditions allowed the rise of racism in Europe (ex. Germany, Italy) and in the Asia (Japan). The allied nations were still traumatized by the destructive
…show more content…
Although it stopped the fighting of WWI, the countries of Germany, Italy, Japan and the USSR were very dissatisfied with the terms that were met. Germany had to pay a humongous amount to retributions, due to them being blamed for the war. This caused the German economy to completely collapse, which caused the United States to help them with payment. All these countries were upset with the amount they did not gain/lost. These terms made these countries possess growing resentment. The Allies also started to not enforce some of the terms of the treaty which allowed Germany and other nations to rebuilt much faster than they would have liked. (Palmer 827). The Depression was also another major factor which helped lead to the start of the Second World War. The reason why is because the conditions caused by the worldwide depression allowed Fascism to gain popularity in nations such as Germany, Italy, and Japan. People were so desperate at that time, they welcomed any new form of government which promised change. This, in turn, allowed ruthless dictators to gain complete control of these nations. Mussolini gained control of Italy. Japan, under a new government, became imperialistic and was invading …show more content…
These ideologies would be both Political Realism and Political Idealism. The best way to tell the difference between these two ideologies is these two perspectives, how the world really is and the how the world should be. Political Realism believes that international relations, such as the state of nature, is in constant flux, in a state of anarchy. The main focus of each statesman is to gain power and stability for his or her nations (Morgenthau 2). That statement should think of rational solutions in the current circumstances in an attempt to meet a certain problem while also thinking of the foreseeable consequences (Morgenthau 1). Ticker explains one of Morgenthau points of Realism as such; “Politics, like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their root in human nature, which is unchanging: therefore is possible to develop a rational theory that reflect these objective laws” (Tickner
Although it stopped the fighting of WWI, the countries of Germany, Italy, Japan and the USSR were very dissatisfied with the terms that were met. Germany had to pay a humongous amount to retributions, due to them being blamed for the war. This caused the German economy to completely collapse, which caused the United States to help them with payment. All these countries were upset with the amount they did not gain/lost. These terms made these countries possess growing resentment. The Allies also started to not enforce some of the terms of the treaty which allowed Germany and other nations to rebuilt much faster than they would have liked. (Palmer 827). The Depression was also another major factor which helped lead to the start of the Second World War. The reason why is because the conditions caused by the worldwide depression allowed Fascism to gain popularity in nations such as Germany, Italy, and Japan. People were so desperate at that time, they welcomed any new form of government which promised change. This, in turn, allowed ruthless dictators to gain complete control of these nations. Mussolini gained control of Italy. Japan, under a new government, became imperialistic and was invading …show more content…
These ideologies would be both Political Realism and Political Idealism. The best way to tell the difference between these two ideologies is these two perspectives, how the world really is and the how the world should be. Political Realism believes that international relations, such as the state of nature, is in constant flux, in a state of anarchy. The main focus of each statesman is to gain power and stability for his or her nations (Morgenthau 2). That statement should think of rational solutions in the current circumstances in an attempt to meet a certain problem while also thinking of the foreseeable consequences (Morgenthau 1). Ticker explains one of Morgenthau points of Realism as such; “Politics, like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their root in human nature, which is unchanging: therefore is possible to develop a rational theory that reflect these objective laws” (Tickner