yr12_induction_nash_m

=Was the ideal form of government for the 20th century a multiparty state?=

Introduction
The 20th century has seen a rapid advance in government and politics around the world. There has also been a lot of conflict throughout the 20th century, why was this? Some historians would say it was the different forms of government that led to conflict and war. I feel that this influences the question; what was the ideal form of government in the 20th century? Firstly, I will examine the argument that agrees that a multiparty state was the ideal form of government. In particular, American and Britain will be used as examples. Secondly, I will examine the argument that disagrees and suggests a single party state was the ideal form of government. Here, the focus will be on Germany, examining the failure of the Weimar Republic and the successes of Nazi Germany.

USA
During the 20th century, America became a world super power. America was supplying resources to countries all over the world and was a vital trading partner. Firstly, it participated in both World Wars but mainly was a supplier until the end. Towards the end, they actually provided troops and weaponry. America has been involved in conflict throughout the 20th century and still is now. Secondly, all of this clearly tested the strength and ability of a leader and their government. [|Presidents] ruled with their governments throughout the 20th century. Due to disagreements with the world, each President had to deal with immense pressure to do the right thing for the people and most succeeded in doing so. The US government includes the President, executive, legislative and judicial. As a multiparty state, America has managed to survive through conflicts and still engage in them. 'Democracy is not so much a form of government as a set of principles' - Woodrow Wilson

Britain
Britain in the 20th century suffered two World Wars, thus, economical damage and a loss of an Empire. Britain always had a [|Prime Minister], who was leader of the elected party and many other parties within the government. Firstly, during the 20th century, Britain’s alliance and relationship with France as an ally blossomed. In a way this has had a great affect on foreign policy and the successes of the allies. Secondly, as a multiparty state, Britain still benefits from the judgement of other parties and their ability to work alongside each other. Thirdly, many examples throughout the 20th century indicate that Britain was successful as a multiparty state in comparison to single party states. Britain survived two World Wars and managed to regain the power it had lost. 'Liberty has restraints but no frontiers' - Lloyd George

The Weimar Republic
In comparison, the [|Weimar Republic] has been considered by many historians a failure. Firstly, the Weimar Republic was considered a symbol for change but in terms of government not much changed. Kaiser Wilhelm had gone but it was still possible for the new leader, Ebert to rule by article 48 in emergencies. This ultimately destroyed the idea of a multiparty state and democracy. Secondly, Germany depended on super powers like America to keep the country going financially, thus the Weimar Republic didn’t actually make any decisions themselves. Thirdly, the voting system for the Weimar Republic was called proportional representation. It is considered one of the biggest failures of the Republic as it produced weak coalition governments. This led to parties not being able to provide Germany with a strong central government.

Nazi Germany
On the other hand, [|Nazi Germany] is an example of a successful single party state. Firstly, the Nazis gave the people what they wanted when they came into power, for example, they reduced unemployment. By doing this they were able to secure the faith and support of the people. Secondly, there were many other dictators like Mussolini and Stalin who the Western allies were scared of in the 1930’s. Thirdly, as a single party state, the Nazis were able to crush the opposition and make all the decisions. Finally, the Nazis were able to re-occupy all of the territory taken from them by the Treaty of Versailles and more. This put Hitler in a strong position to challenge the allies as he started to form alliances with other dictators. "The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it' - Adolf Hitler

Conclusion
In conclusion, the Nazi party as a single party state ultimately seems to be the better choice for the ideal form of government as it was so successful. Despite being successful within Germany, when the Nazis decided to go to war, that was when everything fell through. It seems that what happens within the country benefits the people. When it comes to foreign politics and policies, what these countries are doing seem to affect the rest of the world greatly. [|Democracy] has lasted in Britain and America but it’s interesting to see that it failed in Germany and a dictatorship followed. Therefore, the ideal form of government would be a multiparty state due to the increasing tensions that a single party state has proven to create.