whap

Source 1: "Wartime travel brought soldiers and carriers into contact with foreign ways of life, resulting in cultural exchange. . . . There is evidence also of Hausa [a West African people] 'experiments in architecture of grass and bamboo construction' while the troops were in East Africa, as well as enthusiasm for gathering souvenirs such as cowries and other East African shells 'with the intention of presenting necklaces and waist belts to their women folk.' . . . . Contact with European science and technology was another factor that contributed to change in Nigeria. Before the war, the men know only the casual, nature-oriented time-sense of the village; army life taught them a new concept of punctuality, compatible with reveille, parades, drills, and deadlines. Many Nigerians took their first ride on a train and saw their first car, aeroplane, and motion picture. Large numbers learned to shoot and care for modern weapons—not only rifles, but machine-guns and artillery. Also, soldiers learned basic hygiene, water sterilization, and other methods of disease control and health care. Thousands of Nigerians received their first vaccination and took their first pill during the war." James K. Matthews, United States military historian, "World War I and the Rise of African Nationalism," The Journal of Modern African Studies, 1982 Source 2: "African deaths in combat can be contrasted with those suffered by the French using a variety of standards. As a percentage of all the soldiers mobilized during the war, Senegalese losses were slightly less than those incurred by the French. The picture changes significantly, however, when only combatants are considered. Using this criterion, Senegalese losses were nearly 20 per cent higher than those sustained by their French counterparts. . . . African soldiers seldom served in the cavalry, artillery, engineering and aviation units, where casualties were substantially lower. . . . If only infantry fatalities are considered, . . . French and African losses between 1914 and 1918 were virtually identical: they amounted to slightly over 22 per cent in both cases. . . . This interpretation . . . neglects, however, to consider [that] . . . the Senegalese were not employed in significant numbers as combatants in Europe before July 1916. Prior to this time, African losses accounted for less than 10 per cent of their eventual wartime total, . . . it was precisely because of the staggering dimensions of French losses during the first 22 months of the war . . . that resistance to the massive recruitment of West Africans and their deployment on the Western Front was overcome. If the time factor is taken into consideration, a very different picture begins to emerge. It indicates that during the last two-and-a-half years of the war, Senegalese casualties in Europe were approximately twice as high as those suffered by French infantry combatants." Joe Lunn, military historian, "Les Races Guerrières': Racial Preconceptions in the French Military about West African Soldiers during the First World War," Journal of Contemporary History, 1999 Which of the following does the author of Source 1 cite as evidence of cultural exchange between East and West Africa during the First World War?

Experiments in architecture and the gathering of souvenirs

Source 1: "Wartime travel brought soldiers and carriers into contact with foreign ways of life, resulting in cultural exchange. . . . There is evidence also of Hausa [a West African people] 'experiments in architecture of grass and bamboo construction' while the troops were in East Africa, as well as enthusiasm for gathering souvenirs such as cowries and other East African shells 'with the intention of presenting necklaces and waist belts to their women folk.' . . . . Contact with European science and technology was another factor that contributed to change in Nigeria. Before the war, the men know only the casual, nature-oriented time-sense of the village; army life taught them a new concept of punctuality, compatible with reveille, parades, drills, and deadlines. Many Nigerians took their first ride on a train and saw their first car, aeroplane, and motion picture. Large numbers learned to shoot and care for modern weapons—not only rifles, but machine-guns and artillery. Also, soldiers learned basic hygiene, water sterilization, and other methods of disease control and health care. Thousands of Nigerians received their first vaccination and took their first pill during the war." James K. Matthews, United States military historian, "World War I and the Rise of African Nationalism," The Journal of Modern African Studies, 1982 Source 2: "African deaths in combat can be contrasted with those suffered by the French using a variety of standards. As a percentage of all the soldiers mobilized during the war, Senegalese losses were slightly less than those incurred by the French. The picture changes significantly, however, when only combatants are considered. Using this criterion, Senegalese losses were nearly 20 per cent higher than those sustained by their French counterparts. . . . African soldiers seldom served in the cavalry, artillery, engineering and aviation units, where casualties were substantially lower. . . . If only infantry fatalities are considered, . . . French and African losses between 1914 and 1918 were virtually identical: they amounted to slightly over 22 per cent in both cases. . . . This interpretation . . . neglects, however, to consider [that] . . . the Senegalese were not employed in significant numbers as combatants in Europe before July 1916. Prior to this time, African losses accounted for less than 10 per cent of their eventual wartime total, . . . it was precisely because of the staggering dimensions of French losses during the first 22 months of the war . . . that resistance to the massive recruitment of West Africans and their deployment on the Western Front was overcome. If the time factor is taken into consideration, a very different picture begins to emerge. It indicates that during the last two-and-a-half years of the war, Senegalese casualties in Europe were approximately twice as high as those suffered by French infantry combatants." Joe Lunn, military historian, "Les Races Guerrières': Racial Preconceptions in the French Military about West African Soldiers during the First World War," Journal of Contemporary History, 1999 Which of the following does the author of Source 2 most directly cite as evidence of a higher casualty rate among Senegalese soldiers in combat than among French soldiers in combat?

The casualty rate after July 1916

"Many years later [Prime Minister] Clement Attlee wrote that, if someone asked him, 'What exactly, did Winston [Churchill] do to win the war?' he would have to say 'talk about it.' Edward R. Murrow, the American news correspondent, said much the same thing when he wrote of Churchill's mobilization of words. The effect of his speeches to the nation on British morale is incalculable and can be described, without hyperbole, as transforming. . . . Churchill's words also gripped the attention—as they were meant to—of both politicians and people in the United States and anywhere else that an English-speaking population had access to them. They seriously irritated the Nazis and arguably contributed to Hitler making ill-advised strategic decisions such as switching [German] bombing raids in Britain from airfields to civilian centers. . . . [The speeches themselves] were the first great battle of the Second World War, fought and won, not with Hurricanes* and Spitfires* but with words, passion, and history. . . . In the year that followed the German invasion of France [in May 1940], there was overwhelming evidence of a new-found British social cohesiveness and mutual loyalty. The complete isolation of Britain, fighting on alone, which Hitler not unreasonably assumed would make it a soft target, had precisely the reverse effect. Churchill turned on the 'island nation' rhetoric, and the British people across all classes, with very few exceptions, echoed him. . . . It is impossible not to be struck by the degree to which Britain, which had been such a divided society between the wars, managed to pull together when it mattered most. . . . The unions and employers, so bitterly at odds for so long, now worked together . . . so that no undue [government] pressure needed to be applied to have factories, many of them, of course, staffed by women, working 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The collaborative push made a critical difference to the production of munitions in general, but especially of war planes, which in turn made the difference between winning and losing the Battle of Britain." *British military aircraft used during the Second World War Simon Schama, British historian, A History of Britain: The Fate of Empire, 1776-2000, book published in 2002 All of the following statements are factually accurate. Which could be most directly used to modify Schama's argument that the war provided "overwhelming evidence of a new-found British social cohesiveness and mutual loyalty"?

After a brief period of supporting the war effort, the Indian National Congress continued its anti-imperialist agitation, with Gandhi launching a Quit India campaign in 1942.

"1. Every Hutu should know that a Tutsi woman, wherever she is, works for the interest of her ethnic Tutsi group. Consequently, we should consider a traitor every Hutu who marries a Tutsi woman, befriends a Tutsi woman, or employs a Tutsi woman as a secretary. 2. Every Hutu should know that our Hutu daughters are more suitable and dutiful in their roles as women, wives, and mothers of the family. . . . 4. Every Hutu should know that every Tutsi is dishonest in business. Their only aim is supremacy for their ethnic minority group. As a consequence, every Hutu is a traitor who makes a business partnership with a Tutsi, invests his money in a Tutsi enterprise, lends money to a Tutsi, or gives business favors to a Tutsi. 5. All strategic posts, political, administrative, economic, military, and those in the area of security, should be entrusted to the Hutu. 6. The majority of the education sector must be Hutu. 7. The Rwandan armed forces should be exclusively Hutu. No member of the military should marry a Tutsi. 8. The Hutu should stop having mercy on the Tutsi." Excerpt from the "Hutu Ten Commandments," a manifesto published in Kangura, a newspaper dedicated to the promotion of Hutu supremacy, Kigali, Rwanda, 1990 Which of the following best explains the similarity between Hutu views of the Tutsi in the "Hutu Ten Commandments" and the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany?

Both the Tutsi and Jews were persecuted based on ethnic prejudice.

"Japan's colonial policy aims at extending into its colonies the principle of paternalistic protection followed in the home land. The protection of industry and education, which is a characteristic feature of Japanese administration at home, has largely been transplanted to the Korean peninsula. The results that have followed the industrialization of Korea, for both the native population and the Japanese administration, may be summarized as follows: 1. The development of industries has increased capital in the country and helped Korean society in a general advance toward a capitalistic stage of development. 2. As a result of industrialization, the Japanese administration's financial resources have been increased. 3. Korean mineral products are of kinds that are scarce in Japan proper and consequently there is little competition between Korean and Japanese mineral products. Administration by Japan, the inflow of Japanese capital, and the provision of public education have all tended toward a fundamental transformation of native Korean society. The Koreans are being rapidly modernized and even their inherent seclusive nature is undergoing a marked change. Under their former corrupt rulers, the people were reduced to abject poverty and misery and resigned themselves to fatalism, having been robbed of all incentives to earn and save money. Under Japanese government, however, the Korean people have begun to be active and industrious once again." Tadao Yanaihara, Japanese economist, "Problems of Japanese Administration in Korea," article published in a Canadian journal, 1938 All of the following statements about Canada in the early twentieth century are factually accurate. Which would most likely help to explain why Yanaihara thought that his claims regarding Korea might be well received by a Canadian audience?

Canada's economy grew during most of the early twentieth century under British rule, and Canadian troops willingly helped the British Empire defend its colonial territories in Asia and Africa.

"1. Every Hutu should know that a Tutsi woman, wherever she is, works for the interest of her ethnic Tutsi group. Consequently, we should consider a traitor every Hutu who marries a Tutsi woman, befriends a Tutsi woman, or employs a Tutsi woman as a secretary. 2. Every Hutu should know that our Hutu daughters are more suitable and dutiful in their roles as women, wives, and mothers of the family. . . . 4. Every Hutu should know that every Tutsi is dishonest in business. Their only aim is supremacy for their ethnic minority group. As a consequence, every Hutu is a traitor who makes a business partnership with a Tutsi, invests his money in a Tutsi enterprise, lends money to a Tutsi, or gives business favors to a Tutsi. 5. All strategic posts, political, administrative, economic, military, and those in the area of security, should be entrusted to the Hutu. 6. The majority of the education sector must be Hutu. 7. The Rwandan armed forces should be exclusively Hutu. No member of the military should marry a Tutsi. 8. The Hutu should stop having mercy on the Tutsi." Excerpt from the "Hutu Ten Commandments," a manifesto published in Kangura, a newspaper dedicated to the promotion of Hutu supremacy, Kigali, Rwanda, 1990 The "Hutu Ten Commandments" is best explained as being part of which of the following continuities in twentieth-century history?

Extremist groups using propaganda to target specific minority populations

Source 1: "Wartime travel brought soldiers and carriers into contact with foreign ways of life, resulting in cultural exchange. . . . There is evidence also of Hausa [a West African people] 'experiments in architecture of grass and bamboo construction' while the troops were in East Africa, as well as enthusiasm for gathering souvenirs such as cowries and other East African shells 'with the intention of presenting necklaces and waist belts to their women folk.' . . . . Contact with European science and technology was another factor that contributed to change in Nigeria. Before the war, the men know only the casual, nature-oriented time-sense of the village; army life taught them a new concept of punctuality, compatible with reveille, parades, drills, and deadlines. Many Nigerians took their first ride on a train and saw their first car, aeroplane, and motion picture. Large numbers learned to shoot and care for modern weapons—not only rifles, but machine-guns and artillery. Also, soldiers learned basic hygiene, water sterilization, and other methods of disease control and health care. Thousands of Nigerians received their first vaccination and took their first pill during the war." James K. Matthews, United States military historian, "World War I and the Rise of African Nationalism," The Journal of Modern African Studies, 1982 Source 2: "African deaths in combat can be contrasted with those suffered by the French using a variety of standards. As a percentage of all the soldiers mobilized during the war, Senegalese losses were slightly less than those incurred by the French. The picture changes significantly, however, when only combatants are considered. Using this criterion, Senegalese losses were nearly 20 per cent higher than those sustained by their French counterparts. . . . African soldiers seldom served in the cavalry, artillery, engineering and aviation units, where casualties were substantially lower. . . . If only infantry fatalities are considered, . . . French and African losses between 1914 and 1918 were virtually identical: they amounted to slightly over 22 per cent in both cases. . . . This interpretation . . . neglects, however, to consider [that] . . . the Senegalese were not employed in significant numbers as combatants in Europe before July 1916. Prior to this time, African losses accounted for less than 10 per cent of their eventual wartime total, . . . it was precisely because of the staggering dimensions of French losses during the first 22 months of the war . . . that resistance to the massive recruitment of West Africans and their deployment on the Western Front was overcome. If the time factor is taken into consideration, a very different picture begins to emerge. It indicates that during the last two-and-a-half years of the war, Senegalese casualties in Europe were approximately twice as high as those suffered by French infantry combatants." Joe Lunn, military historian, "Les Races Guerrières': Racial Preconceptions in the French Military about West African Soldiers during the First World War," Journal of Contemporary History, 1999 Which of the following does the author of Source 1 NOT cite as evidence of European science and technology contributing to cultural change in Nigeria?

Gift gathering for women back home

"Many years later [Prime Minister] Clement Attlee wrote that, if someone asked him, 'What exactly, did Winston [Churchill] do to win the war?' he would have to say 'talk about it.' Edward R. Murrow, the American news correspondent, said much the same thing when he wrote of Churchill's mobilization of words. The effect of his speeches to the nation on British morale is incalculable and can be described, without hyperbole, as transforming. . . . Churchill's words also gripped the attention—as they were meant to—of both politicians and people in the United States and anywhere else that an English-speaking population had access to them. They seriously irritated the Nazis and arguably contributed to Hitler making ill-advised strategic decisions such as switching [German] bombing raids in Britain from airfields to civilian centers. . . . [The speeches themselves] were the first great battle of the Second World War, fought and won, not with Hurricanes* and Spitfires* but with words, passion, and history. . . . In the year that followed the German invasion of France [in May 1940], there was overwhelming evidence of a new-found British social cohesiveness and mutual loyalty. The complete isolation of Britain, fighting on alone, which Hitler not unreasonably assumed would make it a soft target, had precisely the reverse effect. Churchill turned on the 'island nation' rhetoric, and the British people across all classes, with very few exceptions, echoed him. . . . It is impossible not to be struck by the degree to which Britain, which had been such a divided society between the wars, managed to pull together when it mattered most. . . . The unions and employers, so bitterly at odds for so long, now worked together . . . so that no undue [government] pressure needed to be applied to have factories, many of them, of course, staffed by women, working 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The collaborative push made a critical difference to the production of munitions in general, but especially of war planes, which in turn made the difference between winning and losing the Battle of Britain." *British military aircraft used during the Second World War Simon Schama, British historian, A History of Britain: The Fate of Empire, 1776-2000, book published in 2002 Which of the following best explains why Schama uses the claim that the British government did not have to apply any "undue pressure" on either factory owners or factory workers during the war?

He wanted to support his argument that Britons were completely mobilized for the war effort.

"Just yesterday, you sent me a telegram appealing to my friendship and called upon me to act as an intermediary and help resolve the conflict between you and the Austro-Hungarian government. But I understand that, even as you did that, your troops were being mobilized against Austria-Hungary. This makes my attempts at meditation almost pointless. Nonetheless, I continued in my efforts today. I now receive fresh news of even more serious Russian preparations for war on my Eastern frontier. Responsibility for the safety of my empire forces me to take defensive and preventive measures. In my endeavors to maintain the peace of the world, I have gone to the utmost limit possible. The responsibility for the disaster that is now threatening the civilized world will not be laid at my door. At this moment, you still have the power to avert war. Nobody is threatening the honor or power of Russia, and you can well afford to await the result of my mediation. My friendship for you and your empire, transmitted to me by my grandfather on his deathbed, has always been sacred to me and I have often supported Russia in the past when she was in serious trouble." Wilhelm II, emperor of Germany, telegram to Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, July 31, 1914 Wilhelm II's assurances in the second paragraph that "nobody is threatening the honor or power of Russia" and that the tsar can "well afford" to await the results of attempts to defuse the crisis best testify to the importance of which of the following factors in the outbreak of the First World War?

Intense nationalism, fueled by mass media, often forced the hand of military and political leaders.

"Many years later [Prime Minister] Clement Attlee wrote that, if someone asked him, 'What exactly, did Winston [Churchill] do to win the war?' he would have to say 'talk about it.' Edward R. Murrow, the American news correspondent, said much the same thing when he wrote of Churchill's mobilization of words. The effect of his speeches to the nation on British morale is incalculable and can be described, without hyperbole, as transforming. . . . Churchill's words also gripped the attention—as they were meant to—of both politicians and people in the United States and anywhere else that an English-speaking population had access to them. They seriously irritated the Nazis and arguably contributed to Hitler making ill-advised strategic decisions such as switching [German] bombing raids in Britain from airfields to civilian centers. . . . [The speeches themselves] were the first great battle of the Second World War, fought and won, not with Hurricanes* and Spitfires* but with words, passion, and history. . . . In the year that followed the German invasion of France [in May 1940], there was overwhelming evidence of a new-found British social cohesiveness and mutual loyalty. The complete isolation of Britain, fighting on alone, which Hitler not unreasonably assumed would make it a soft target, had precisely the reverse effect. Churchill turned on the 'island nation' rhetoric, and the British people across all classes, with very few exceptions, echoed him. . . . It is impossible not to be struck by the degree to which Britain, which had been such a divided society between the wars, managed to pull together when it mattered most. . . . The unions and employers, so bitterly at odds for so long, now worked together . . . so that no undue [government] pressure needed to be applied to have factories, many of them, of course, staffed by women, working 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The collaborative push made a critical difference to the production of munitions in general, but especially of war planes, which in turn made the difference between winning and losing the Battle of Britain." *British military aircraft used during the Second World War Simon Schama, British historian, A History of Britain: The Fate of Empire, 1776-2000, book published in 2002 Which of the following would best support Schama's argument in the first paragraph about the role of Churchill's speeches in Great Britain's war effort?

New mass media such as radio greatly expanded the reach of governments' mobilization efforts.

"Just yesterday, you sent me a telegram appealing to my friendship and called upon me to act as an intermediary and help resolve the conflict between you and the Austro-Hungarian government. But I understand that, even as you did that, your troops were being mobilized against Austria-Hungary. This makes my attempts at meditation almost pointless. Nonetheless, I continued in my efforts today. I now receive fresh news of even more serious Russian preparations for war on my Eastern frontier. Responsibility for the safety of my empire forces me to take defensive and preventive measures. In my endeavors to maintain the peace of the world, I have gone to the utmost limit possible. The responsibility for the disaster that is now threatening the civilized world will not be laid at my door. At this moment, you still have the power to avert war. Nobody is threatening the honor or power of Russia, and you can well afford to await the result of my mediation. My friendship for you and your empire, transmitted to me by my grandfather on his deathbed, has always been sacred to me and I have often supported Russia in the past when she was in serious trouble." Wilhelm II, emperor of Germany, telegram to Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, July 31, 1914 The passage can best be used to explain the role of which of the following in bringing about the First World War?

Rival great power alliances

"Just yesterday, you sent me a telegram appealing to my friendship and called upon me to act as an intermediary and help resolve the conflict between you and the Austro-Hungarian government. But I understand that, even as you did that, your troops were being mobilized against Austria-Hungary. This makes my attempts at meditation almost pointless. Nonetheless, I continued in my efforts today. I now receive fresh news of even more serious Russian preparations for war on my Eastern frontier. Responsibility for the safety of my empire forces me to take defensive and preventive measures. In my endeavors to maintain the peace of the world, I have gone to the utmost limit possible. The responsibility for the disaster that is now threatening the civilized world will not be laid at my door. At this moment, you still have the power to avert war. Nobody is threatening the honor or power of Russia, and you can well afford to await the result of my mediation. My friendship for you and your empire, transmitted to me by my grandfather on his deathbed, has always been sacred to me and I have often supported Russia in the past when she was in serious trouble." Wilhelm II, emperor of Germany, telegram to Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, July 31, 1914 Which of the following events that preceded the outbreak of the First World War best explains why Russian troops were being mobilized against Austria-Hungary, as stated in the first paragraph?

Russia was acting in support of Serbia, which was facing an imminent Austro-Hungarian attack following the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

(Picture of workers and soldiers marching in the streets of St. Petersburg, Russian Empire, after taking over control of the city, February 1917) The makeup of the force shown in the image is best explained by the fact that by 1917

Russia's army morale and home-front effort were collapsing because of the strains of total war

"Dear Comrade Lenin! I cannot avoid pointing out an outrageous phenomenon that can still be observed all over our Soviet Russia. Even though it has been more than two years since power in Russia has been in the hands of the Soviets, in all major cities certain things can be observed that do not at all indicate the existence of a dictatorship of the proletariat. I want to point out the most insulting one. In our city, Kazan (and as I mentioned, this also happens in all major cities), there live many former factory owners and other members of the bourgeoisie. Even though their factories and businesses have been nationalized, if you enter their apartments you would see them still living as they did in the 'good old times.' These gentlemen do not seem to know that the Civil War is still raging and that power is in the hands of the workers. As in the past, they continue to reside in the most luxurious, spacious, and warm apartments, with luxurious furniture. In their kitchens, you would still see hired cooks with white caps and uniforms, and in their households you would still see a variety of servants. In the summer they still go out to their country houses to 'relax.' When I see this, I become almost ashamed of our proletarian revolution. Why has no attention been paid to this yet? Why are workers not being moved into the bourgeois apartments and the bourgeois into workers' cellars? Why is their furniture and other belongings not being confiscated and distributed to the workers? And anyway, why has this gang of bourgeois parasites not yet been destroyed? I am turning to you, Comrade Lenin, as our leader and the most loyal friend of the proletariat, and I am waiting so that this issue, which concerns me and many other honest communists, can be resolved by an appropriate decree." Letter to Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin from a member of the Communist Party living in Kazan, Russia, November, 1920 Which of the following aspects of the immediate historical situation in which the letter was written best explains the author's demands toward the end of the second paragraph?

The Soviet government used the pretext of the ongoing civil war to engage in repressive policies against entire sections of its population.

(Picture of workers and soldiers marching in the streets of St. Petersburg, Russian Empire, after taking over control of the city, February 1917) The unrest reflected in the image is best explained by which of the following features of the Russian government at the time of the photograph?

The Tsarist regime that governed Russia was autocratic and unresponsive to calls for reform.

"1. Every Hutu should know that a Tutsi woman, wherever she is, works for the interest of her ethnic Tutsi group. Consequently, we should consider a traitor every Hutu who marries a Tutsi woman, befriends a Tutsi woman, or employs a Tutsi woman as a secretary. 2. Every Hutu should know that our Hutu daughters are more suitable and dutiful in their roles as women, wives, and mothers of the family. . . . 4. Every Hutu should know that every Tutsi is dishonest in business. Their only aim is supremacy for their ethnic minority group. As a consequence, every Hutu is a traitor who makes a business partnership with a Tutsi, invests his money in a Tutsi enterprise, lends money to a Tutsi, or gives business favors to a Tutsi. 5. All strategic posts, political, administrative, economic, military, and those in the area of security, should be entrusted to the Hutu. 6. The majority of the education sector must be Hutu. 7. The Rwandan armed forces should be exclusively Hutu. No member of the military should marry a Tutsi. 8. The Hutu should stop having mercy on the Tutsi." Excerpt from the "Hutu Ten Commandments," a manifesto published in Kangura, a newspaper dedicated to the promotion of Hutu supremacy, Kigali, Rwanda, 1990 All of the following statements about the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups in Rwanda are factually accurate. Which would best explain how the attitudes expressed in the "Hutu Ten Commandments" were a reaction to past developments in Rwandan history?

The Tutsi were heavily favored and promoted to positions of power under European colonial rule, while the Hutu were not.

"Dear Comrade Lenin! I cannot avoid pointing out an outrageous phenomenon that can still be observed all over our Soviet Russia. Even though it has been more than two years since power in Russia has been in the hands of the Soviets, in all major cities certain things can be observed that do not at all indicate the existence of a dictatorship of the proletariat. I want to point out the most insulting one. In our city, Kazan (and as I mentioned, this also happens in all major cities), there live many former factory owners and other members of the bourgeoisie. Even though their factories and businesses have been nationalized, if you enter their apartments you would see them still living as they did in the 'good old times.' These gentlemen do not seem to know that the Civil War is still raging and that power is in the hands of the workers. As in the past, they continue to reside in the most luxurious, spacious, and warm apartments, with luxurious furniture. In their kitchens, you would still see hired cooks with white caps and uniforms, and in their households you would still see a variety of servants. In the summer they still go out to their country houses to 'relax.' When I see this, I become almost ashamed of our proletarian revolution. Why has no attention been paid to this yet? Why are workers not being moved into the bourgeois apartments and the bourgeois into workers' cellars? Why is their furniture and other belongings not being confiscated and distributed to the workers? And anyway, why has this gang of bourgeois parasites not yet been destroyed? I am turning to you, Comrade Lenin, as our leader and the most loyal friend of the proletariat, and I am waiting so that this issue, which concerns me and many other honest communists, can be resolved by an appropriate decree." Letter to Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin from a member of the Communist Party living in Kazan, Russia, November, 1920 Considering the purpose of the letter, it most likely overstates which of the following?

The extent to which wealthy Russians continued to live exactly as they did before the revolution (second paragraph).

"The German people once built up a colonial empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty. That colonial empire was taken away from us unreasonably. First, it was said that the natives in those colonies did not want to belong to Germany. But, who asked them if they wished to belong to some other power and when were these natives ever asked if they had been content with the power that formerly ruled them? Second, it is stated that the colonies were not administered properly by the Germans, but Germany had these colonies only for a few decades and they were in a process of development. Third, it is said that the colonies are of no real value. But, if that is the case, then they can be of no value to any other state. Moreover, Germany has never demanded colonies for military purposes, but exclusively for economic purposes. It is obvious that in times of general prosperity the value of certain territories may decrease, but it is just as evident that in times of distress such value increases. Today, Germany lives in a time of difficult struggle for foodstuffs and raw materials. Sufficient imports are conceivable only if there is a continued and lasting increase in our exports. Therefore, as a matter of course, our demand for colonies for our densely populated country will be put forward again and again." Adolf Hitler, German chancellor, speech delivered in the German parliament, 1937 The point of view that Hitler expresses in the first three paragraphs is most directly significant in helping to explain how which of the following contributed to starting the Second World War?

The provisions of the Treaty of Versailles that ended the First World War

"Japan's colonial policy aims at extending into its colonies the principle of paternalistic protection followed in the home land. The protection of industry and education, which is a characteristic feature of Japanese administration at home, has largely been transplanted to the Korean peninsula. The results that have followed the industrialization of Korea, for both the native population and the Japanese administration, may be summarized as follows: 1. The development of industries has increased capital in the country and helped Korean society in a general advance toward a capitalistic stage of development. 2. As a result of industrialization, the Japanese administration's financial resources have been increased. 3. Korean mineral products are of kinds that are scarce in Japan proper and consequently there is little competition between Korean and Japanese mineral products. Administration by Japan, the inflow of Japanese capital, and the provision of public education have all tended toward a fundamental transformation of native Korean society. The Koreans are being rapidly modernized and even their inherent seclusive nature is undergoing a marked change. Under their former corrupt rulers, the people were reduced to abject poverty and misery and resigned themselves to fatalism, having been robbed of all incentives to earn and save money. Under Japanese government, however, the Korean people have begun to be active and industrious once again." Tadao Yanaihara, Japanese economist, "Problems of Japanese Administration in Korea," article published in a Canadian journal, 1938 Which of the following best explains the long-term historical significance of the views expressed by Yanaihara in the passage?

They show that some members of the Japanese elite sought to justify aggressive Japanese colonial efforts in China and the Pacific region.

(Picture of workers and soldiers marching in the streets of St. Petersburg, Russian Empire, after taking over control of the city, February 1917) Which of the following best characterizes the significance of the events in Russia in the winter of 1917, as shown in the image?

They started a process that eventually led to a communist revolution.

"Japan's colonial policy aims at extending into its colonies the principle of paternalistic protection followed in the home land. The protection of industry and education, which is a characteristic feature of Japanese administration at home, has largely been transplanted to the Korean peninsula. The results that have followed the industrialization of Korea, for both the native population and the Japanese administration, may be summarized as follows: 1. The development of industries has increased capital in the country and helped Korean society in a general advance toward a capitalistic stage of development. 2. As a result of industrialization, the Japanese administration's financial resources have been increased. 3. Korean mineral products are of kinds that are scarce in Japan proper and consequently there is little competition between Korean and Japanese mineral products. Administration by Japan, the inflow of Japanese capital, and the provision of public education have all tended toward a fundamental transformation of native Korean society. The Koreans are being rapidly modernized and even their inherent seclusive nature is undergoing a marked change. Under their former corrupt rulers, the people were reduced to abject poverty and misery and resigned themselves to fatalism, having been robbed of all incentives to earn and save money. Under Japanese government, however, the Korean people have begun to be active and industrious once again." Tadao Yanaihara, Japanese economist, "Problems of Japanese Administration in Korea," article published in a Canadian journal, 1938 Which of the following best explains a likely significant purpose behind Yanaihara publishing his article in a Canadian journal?

Yanaihara wished to justify continued Japanese colonial rule of Korea to potentially hostile Western states.

"The German people once built up a colonial empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty. That colonial empire was taken away from us unreasonably. First, it was said that the natives in those colonies did not want to belong to Germany. But, who asked them if they wished to belong to some other power and when were these natives ever asked if they had been content with the power that formerly ruled them? Second, it is stated that the colonies were not administered properly by the Germans, but Germany had these colonies only for a few decades and they were in a process of development. Third, it is said that the colonies are of no real value. But, if that is the case, then they can be of no value to any other state. Moreover, Germany has never demanded colonies for military purposes, but exclusively for economic purposes. It is obvious that in times of general prosperity the value of certain territories may decrease, but it is just as evident that in times of distress such value increases. Today, Germany lives in a time of difficult struggle for foodstuffs and raw materials. Sufficient imports are conceivable only if there is a continued and lasting increase in our exports. Therefore, as a matter of course, our demand for colonies for our densely populated country will be put forward again and again." Adolf Hitler, German chancellor, speech delivered in the German parliament, 1937 In the context of the late 1930s, the arguments that Hitler makes in the last paragraph are most significant in explaining how

imperialist aspirations contributed to motivating the policies of fascist states

"The German people once built up a colonial empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty. That colonial empire was taken away from us unreasonably. First, it was said that the natives in those colonies did not want to belong to Germany. But, who asked them if they wished to belong to some other power and when were these natives ever asked if they had been content with the power that formerly ruled them? Second, it is stated that the colonies were not administered properly by the Germans, but Germany had these colonies only for a few decades and they were in a process of development. Third, it is said that the colonies are of no real value. But, if that is the case, then they can be of no value to any other state. Moreover, Germany has never demanded colonies for military purposes, but exclusively for economic purposes. It is obvious that in times of general prosperity the value of certain territories may decrease, but it is just as evident that in times of distress such value increases. Today, Germany lives in a time of difficult struggle for foodstuffs and raw materials. Sufficient imports are conceivable only if there is a continued and lasting increase in our exports. Therefore, as a matter of course, our demand for colonies for our densely populated country will be put forward again and again." Adolf Hitler, German chancellor, speech delivered in the German parliament, 1937 Based on the historical situation in which the speech was given, Hitler's most significant motivation for giving the speech was likely to continue to

reinforce the idea to the German people that past injustices required Germany to continue its military buildup and engage in future territorial expansion

"Dear Comrade Lenin! I cannot avoid pointing out an outrageous phenomenon that can still be observed all over our Soviet Russia. Even though it has been more than two years since power in Russia has been in the hands of the Soviets, in all major cities certain things can be observed that do not at all indicate the existence of a dictatorship of the proletariat. I want to point out the most insulting one. In our city, Kazan (and as I mentioned, this also happens in all major cities), there live many former factory owners and other members of the bourgeoisie. Even though their factories and businesses have been nationalized, if you enter their apartments you would see them still living as they did in the 'good old times.' These gentlemen do not seem to know that the Civil War is still raging and that power is in the hands of the workers. As in the past, they continue to reside in the most luxurious, spacious, and warm apartments, with luxurious furniture. In their kitchens, you would still see hired cooks with white caps and uniforms, and in their households you would still see a variety of servants. In the summer they still go out to their country houses to 'relax.' When I see this, I become almost ashamed of our proletarian revolution. Why has no attention been paid to this yet? Why are workers not being moved into the bourgeois apartments and the bourgeois into workers' cellars? Why is their furniture and other belongings not being confiscated and distributed to the workers? And anyway, why has this gang of bourgeois parasites not yet been destroyed? I am turning to you, Comrade Lenin, as our leader and the most loyal friend of the proletariat, and I am waiting so that this issue, which concerns me and many other honest communists, can be resolved by an appropriate decree." Letter to Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin from a member of the Communist Party living in Kazan, Russia, November, 1920 The letter's significance as a source of information on popular attitudes to Bolshevik revolutionary policies lies in the fact that it suggests that some Soviet citizens

supported the Bolsheviks in their nationalization of industrial property but urged them to seize the upper classes' private property as well