1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Nonamiya [84]
1 year ago
6

Great Britain and France avoided a take over by fascist by

History
1 answer:
maks197457 [2]1 year ago
5 0

Answer:

Great Britain and France avoid a take over by fascists' by restricting freedom of speech.

Explanation:

Fascism is a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc. , and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.  

How Britain and France avoided fascist revolution inside their own country during rise of fascism in Italy and Germany?

What made Mussolini’s Fascism, and Lenin’s Communism too, was a specific and unique situation, never to be repeated in later history: namely, the presence of enormous masses of disaffected veterans, with recent experience of war at a very high technical level of skill, and angry about the condition of their country. (And of enormous amounts of weapons.) Fascism was not made by speeches or by money, but by tens of thousands of men gathering in armed bands to beat up enemies. And that being the case, what happened to the similar masses of veterans who came home to France, Britain, and America too, after 1918?

Well, France was exhausted. She had fought with her full strength from day one, whereas Britain had taken time to deploy its whole strength, and America and Italy had only entered the war much later. For five years, every man who could be spared had been at the Front. Her losses were larger in proportion than those of any other great power. And on the positive side, France, like Britain and America, was prosperous. The veterans went home to a country that was comparatively able to receive them, give them a place to be, and not foster any dangerous mass disaffection. This is of course relatively speaking. There will have been anger enough, irritation enough, even some disaffection. But the only real case of violence from below due to disaffection was the riot in Paris that followed the Stavisky affair in early 1934, and that, compared to what took place daily in other countries, was a very bad play of a riot.

ON the other hand, both America and Britain experienced situations that had more than a taste of Fascism, but that failed to develop into freedom-destroying movements. In America, Fascism could have come from above. The last few years of the Wilson administration were horrendous: the Red Scare fanaticized large strata of the population, and the hatred came from the top, from Wilson and his terrible AG Palmer. (Palmer was a Quaker. So was Richard Nixon. Is there a reason why Quakers in politics should prove particularly dangerous?) Hate and fear of “reds” was also the driving force of Italian Fascism; and Wilson and Palmer mobilized it in ways and with goals that Mussolini would have understood. Had Wilson not suffered his famous collapse, he might have been a real danger: he intended to run for a third term in office. And the nationwide spread of the new KKK, well beyond the bounds of the old South, shows that he might have found a pool of willing stormtroopers. Altogether, I think America dodged a bullet the size of a Gatling shot when Wilson collapsed in office.

Britain’s own Blackshirt moment took place in Ireland. Sociologically, culturally, psychologically, the Blacks and Tans were the Blackshirts of Britain - masses of disaffected veterans sent into the streets to harass and terrify political enemies, bullies in non-standard uniforms with a loose relationship with the authorities. Only, their relationship with public opinion developed in an exactly opposite direction. Whereas Italy’s majority, horrified by Socialist violence at home and by Communist brutality abroad, tended increasingly to excuse the Blackshirts and wink at their violence, in Britain - possibly because of the influence of the American media, which were largely against British rule in Ireland - the paramilitary force found itself increasingly isolated from the country’s mainstream, and eventually their evil reputation became an asset to their own enemies and contributed to British acceptance of Irish independence.

Thanks,
Eddie

You might be interested in
Explain one way in which trade affected the process of state building in the Societies of Mesopotamia
Ugo [173]

Answer:

hmmmmmmmmmmm

Explanation:

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm im blind

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The first major labor union was founded in 1866 by William Sylvis. What was the name of this union? Knights of Labor American Fe
lesya692 [45]

The correct answer is C. National Labor Union

Explanation:

William Sylvis was an American leader during the 19th century, mainly known for its role in labor unions. Indeed, Sylvis was the first member of a trade union movement Philadelphia, later he supported different unions during the civil war and finally, he decided to create a labor and trade union as he dreamt of a union that integrated multiple workers and sectors. In this way, by 1866 William Sylvis founded the National Labor Union, which as the first union of this kind and integrated multiple local unions. Therefore, the name of the union William Sylvis founded was the "National Labor Union".

5 0
3 years ago
How were the precolonial kingdoms of west africa similar from the precolonial kingdoms of southern africa?
Alex

The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were people from central and western Africa, who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids)

HOPE THIS HELPED!!! XD

4 0
3 years ago
True or false 5. in 508 bce, cleisthenes of athens ensured votes for all citizens regardless of ancestry and formed a council
Talja [164]
I believe the correct answer is true.
8 0
3 years ago
The diverse cultural landscape of Texas has caused different cultures to blend and innovate. Tex-Mex illustrates this cultural i
jeka94

Answer:

c. a combination of two cuisines of Texas and Mexico

Explanation:

The diverse cultural landscape of Texas has caused different cultures to blend and innovate.

Tex-Mex illustrates this cultural innovation because it is a combination of two cuisines of Texas and Mexico.

9 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Who founded the Red Cross?
    5·2 answers
  • Shakespeare’s historical plays dramatize the lives of English rulers during the Medieval era. Why are these plays not always his
    7·2 answers
  • Which was a contributing factor in President Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb?
    12·1 answer
  • How did the physical geography of New England affect the economic activities in New England
    13·1 answer
  • Who’s the first president in 1973
    9·2 answers
  • What did Hiram Rhodes Revels argue for in the Senate?
    13·1 answer
  • Results of the treaty of Greenville
    6·1 answer
  • Identify and explain the role of Catholic Church in European feudal society.
    6·1 answer
  • President Lyndon B. Johnson<br><br><br><br> asap
    15·2 answers
  • Mahahalagang salita na iyong
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!