Mikhail Gorbachev and the end of Communism

Communism has seen a painfully short lifespan and limited success as a government for nations. Most government prefectures have lasted for at least three hundred years, and each developed plus expanded on over the years. Democracy had its roots in Athens, Monarchies in early Britain. The list goes on. But Communism hasn’t been given too much credit. Yes, it did become somewhat commonplace in Europe during the late 1800’s and into 1960, but that’s about as long it has lasted. Perhaps it was carried out inefficiently? Or perhaps, it was just not developed enough. Whatever the case, the USSR was among the last countries to have a completely communist society in 1985. But they would come to undo the work achieved by Vladimir Lenin, who brought communism to Russia. The leader of the de-communism movement was Mikhail Gorbachev.

Mikhail Gorbachev’s control over the movement of reforms has had its ties to the past. Gorbachev was born during the totalitarian state of Joseph Stalin. He faced a hard life working as a collective farmer on the government owned farms. The suffering he dealt with helped inspire him to make reforms to the nation he was born into. We he came to office in the 1980’s, he did not wish for his Russia to continue Communism. He saw how it had weakened his country, and wanted to avoid any severe economical consequences and political consequences that the Soviet Union had suffered during his childhood, when Joseph Stalin was dictator. In a nutshell, Mikhail Gorbachev was opposed to the restriction of freedom. When he was elected for General Secretary in 1985, he wished to change the USSR for the better.

Gorbachev set his marks to emulating the capitalist type economy and less conforming laws. This organized plan for the reform movement across the USSR was called Perestroika, Russian for “reconstruction.” In summer 1987, Gorbachev met with the CPSU, or Communist Party of the Soviet Union, where he laid the groundwork for goals he wished to be met in his society changing reform that was Perestroika. He also created a state of openness to ideas that the society could be improved upon. This was called the Glasnost, Russian for “transparency,” where ideas for change and what should be changed could be expressed, and criticized openly, contrary to the old Communist regime’ that encouraged people to keep everything to themselves. People became full of hope again: they’d finally be breaking out of the oppression of Communism, and back into freedom. The Perestroika program brought numerous and astonishingly quick changes to the USSR. It allowed religious practice again, after being abolished in the union in the 1930’s. Churches reopened as a result, and people were content with the change. The open policy of the union now allowed for a sort of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. As a result, dissidents who had gone against the Communist regime’ were released from prison. It also allowed authors to write as they wished again. In conjunction, people began to openly criticize how the USSR functioned, and without being thrown into jail for it. Besides social reforms, the Perestroika brought some very significant economic reforms. Most importantly, it adopted capitalism. People were no longer ordered what to do and how to do it. It was a free economy now, and people could begin whatever business they liked. There were two small downsides to this: one, business were no longer funded by the government, so if they failed, they failed, and two, the shift from “do the work because you have to” to “do the work because you can make money” was a shock to many, since now effort had to be outputted to make a living.

Can you see the stark differences between this new USSR policy compared to the old Communist policy? The change was from restriction to freedom, to working for the government to working for yourself, and from persecution for individuality to freedom of expression. The reforms paved a crystal clear path to the end of Communism, because one of the only governments to still use Communism was the USSR. What happens when the last country of Communism loses its Communist aspects? Its not Communist anymore.

Collapse of Communism

Communism seemed to have a permanent establishment in Europe at one point. They controlled nearly all of Eastern Europe, and established an Iron Curtain that prevented any sort of information to get into, or leave the USSR. Its stagnant hold on Europe during the Cold War looked as if it would never be perturbed and disintegrate. But instead, that’s actually what happened: its was severely perturbed with reforms and did disintegrate. When Mikhail Gorbachev was elected the General Secretary of the Soviet Union, his democracy-inspired reforms had ultimately set the course for the collapse of Communism in the Soviet Union.

The surge of reforms in the Soviet Union began to fuel the people’s imaginations for more freedom. Being granted so much more freedom than they ever had since its becoming Communist by Vladimir Lenin, they decided they wanted more. The mixed USSR nationalities started to fight to obtain their freedom. The first to take action for freedom was Lithuania, who declared their freedom in March 1990. Gorbachev feared that more of the USSR’s republics would follow in the same footsteps as Lithuania, so he first issued a blockade against the nation, but then in January 1991, Soviet troops launched an assault on civilians in Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania. This shocking event lowered the people’s respect for Mikhail Gorbachev, allowing for a tidal wave victor of Boris Yeltsin to assume control of the Soviet Union as president in June 1991.

Maybe the USSR and Communism had a certain critical turning point in August hadn’t happened. August 18trh, 1991, the conservatives of the Communist regime’ attempted a coup against Gorbachev and the Soviet Union’s capital, Moscow. Two days later, the State Committee under the conservatives were ordered to destroy the parliament building. But they refused to. That night, the forces were withdrawn. Ironically, that same night, Gorbachev returned to Moscow. Because of the failed coup, the other members of the USSR became infuriated. Rebellions and mass riots broke out in many countries. Sudden chaos forced Yeltsin to make drastic changes to the government, or else the doom of the Soviet Union was impendent. He issued a free market economy, hoping that the people would quickly adapt and that the problems facing the union would cease. But it failed horribly instead. Inflation soared. As more economical and political problems erupted all over the sate, Yeltsin became increasingly dictator like, just as Russia first began Communist, developed democratic influences under Lenin, and converted to a totalitarian under Stalin sixty years earlier. Soon, the entire state was racked, and Communism had collapsed under the pressure of numerous rebellions, economical failure, and government failure.

Besides the fall of communism in the USSR (which became the CIS, or Commonwealth of Independent States in 1991, Germany was undergoing its own major change. In August 1961, the Berlin Wall was constructed in the center of Germany, with its purpose being to separate the Communist East Germany from the Western side. It was a strong fortification, and anyone who tried to trespass were either quickly shot down, or gassed. Even when fording the wall in groups, they were all killed. For 28 years, this stalemate between the two sides of Germany remained, that is until 1989. In that November, demolition work was taken up, and grew to hundreds of people coming with sledgehammers to tear down the wall. And soon, it fell. The barrier between communism and the outside had finally been broken down. Not to mention, it was not the government who broke it down. It was the people. Sledgehammer wielding people. They grew tired of communism and made the change.

Creation of Israel

Despite the Jews have appeared in many historical contexts and period, it is ironic that they haven’t had a home country since the time of Judaea. They have also tended to be the center of numerous conflicts within the world, ranging from the persecution of the Jews in the First Crusade, to the Holocaust in Europe.

The Jews have been harshly beat down over the years and all over the world. It all began in the Kingdom of Judea. Since the Paleolithic Age, this area has been inhabited by various groups of people, most notably the Jews. They retained their kingdom until 560BC when their homes were conquered by the Babylonians, and dissimilated its people into different parts of Europe. Prior to this was the expulsion of the Jews from Egypt, resulting in a higher degree of separation and developments of the Jews (this was recorded and added into the Torah and Bible as the Book of Exodus). When the Roman Empire was established, it initiated the Jewish Diaspora, Hebrew for “exile,” around 7 BCE. The Diaspora was responsible for moving Jews away from the Judea region in the Roman Empire. This contributed even more to the spreading of the Jews into Europe, and also a new front: the Middle East. From this point on, they had been continually moved from location to location. Nations and people alike have dispersed them to other nations as their way of avoiding to deal with them. This Diaspora has continued for two thousand years, and it could be argued that it is continuing today. The most recent re-location of the Jews, however, was in the recreation of a Jewish nation, one which was deserved after years of separation from their homeland. This new nation was Israel.

The first ideas for an all Jew nation were proposed by Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism. Zionism is the concept that an individual nation for the Jews should be created. It also refers to the actual mass movement of the Jews into the (spoilers) eventually created nation. In the late 1800’s, the beginnings of this mass immigration into Palestine resulted in conflicts with the Arabs who had the majority of control over the area; it was the beginning of the tensions that would rack the Israelis and the Arabs for years to come. Theodor Herzl was responsible for encouraging this mass movement. On September 3, 1897, he called for a congress for Zionists in Basel, Switzerland, where ideas for an independent Israel and the making of the World Zionist Organization. Fast forward to a year before the end of World War I, 1917. Arthur Balfour, a British Foreign Secretary, established a mandate for a creation of an all Jewish nation in Palestine. This mandate was called the Balfour Declaration. Not only did this concept had widespread support of nations around the world, it gained immense popularity with the Jews themselves. Since their forceful removal from Judea, Jews worldwide had been wishing to return to the “Holy Land” of their ancestors. It was essentially a form of nationalism that fueled their well purposed desperation for their own nation. When the oppressive pogroms of Russia further discriminated the Jews, and Adolph Hitler’s insanity racked through the Jewish population in the form of the Holocaust, the nationalistic feeling of the rightful owners of the Holy Land increased rapidly. But of course, the Arabs had a huge problem with this: Palestine was their nation. They ked riots against the British until 1939, when the British parliament issued the White Paper, a document that said only 75,000 Jews could immigrate into Palestine for the next five years (ironically coinciding with the length of Hitler’s Final Solution).

The second World War ended in British victory. I assume that because Britain was too weak itself to handle any political problems with Palestine, it ceased the Balfour Declaration, and dropped all the weight of the problem onto the United Nations. On November 29th, 1947, in UN Resolution 181, it was agreed that Palestine would be partitioned. One side would become all Jew and the other would become all Arab. As one would think, the Arabs rejected it, and the Jews accepted. Arabs argued that it was their rightful land. But the same applied for the Jews. The Arabs claimed to be descendants of Abraham, who said that this land would be for his descendants. But the same applied for the Hews. The Arabs said it was important for their religion. But the same applied for the Jews. This monotonous, but serious conflict needed a final agreement. Nations like the United States were for the proposal, so it came to be. On May 14, 1948, Israel, the land for and of the Jewish people and Judaism was created, as was it was predicted in Bible prophecy.

Apparently, Israel was hated. Really hated. The day after it was created, it was attacked on all sides by its everlasting enemies: the Arabs. Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Iraq all combined forces and attacked Israel. Call it divine intervention, or just advance weaponry and a strategic location, Israel emerged victorious for the war in 1948. But it was not the end of conflict. To escape turmoil, many Jews and Arabs alike fled their countries. In the Rhodes Armistice of 1949, Arabian refugees settled along the West Bank, creating a crisis in that region still present today. More wars ensued in the region until present day.

Nelson Mandela and Apartheid

Apartheid - It is a term synonymous to segregation. In South Africa, it was the separation of the Bantu (black), mixed people, and whites.

Acrimony towards the Bantu, or Blacks, of South Africa has been a commonplace practice in the early 1900’s. That is, until the coming of Nelson Mandela. The Bantu suffered from the laws of Apartheid, a derogative set of laws that slimmed the rights of the native blacks to nearly nothing. Mandela, who had felt the effects of Apartheid first hand, became president of the African Nation Congress (ANC), who in synchronization with the United Democratic Front (the UDF), combated for the abolition of apartheid and free rights for the native people.

The Apartheid laws were created by the Prime Minister of South Africa, Daniel Francois Malan and his cabinet in 1948. Its purpose was to retain imperialistic European superiority in the region, which it did achieve. Except this achievement was not something the Blacks of South Africa were particularly proud of. From this first horrible policy stemmed more racist policies that segregated the blacks from the whites to a higher degree. For example, the Separate Amenities Act of 1953 divided transportation and public places into two divisions: nonwhite and white. Similar to what was done in the United States, blacks were bound by the law to go exclusively to black public areas and use black transportation; same for the whites. The British were so racist against the South Africans that they added a new act called the Bantu Education Act of 1953, which dumbed down the quality and amount of education that blacks would receive (likely a way to keep the blacks uninformed, so to not encourage any ideas that would set them against the whites).

Nelson Mandela was an active and key member of the ANC. He and his comrades lead non-violent protests and practiced civil disobedience. But this was to little avail. Though convicted in 1961 for treason, he became the leader of an underground ANC that utilized guerilla warfare to make the abolishment of apartheid happen. In 1962, he was finally arrested and sentenced to 27 years in prison on Robben Island. He remained here working in the quarry of the prison day after day. Though in prison, the number of pro-Nelson followers did not decrease. Actually, they increased. A lot. The imprisonment of Nelson actually enforced the people’s will to fight against apartheid. The whites realized the dilemma. They knew that if Mandela were to die in prison, they’d have to face an all out conflict against the Bantu. To avoid this theorized war, they released Mandela early in 1991.

Out of prison on February 11th, 1990, Nelson Mandela had control over all the people of Southern Africa. All he had to do was say the word, and he could have led a armed resistance to completely destroy the apartheid laws. But the point in fact is that he didn’t. He did not resort to violence, and one that could have wiped out all the whites from South Africa. Instead, he rejoined the ANC to negotiate with the white leaders to reach a peaceful conclusion. This is why the articles and authors of the links provided respect and honor Mandela so greatly: he had humble beginnings, sponsoring civil disobedience to gain independence for his people and country. Though he did give into using violence, he testifies that it was the only option, because they would never obtain their freedom if the whites remained in the stubborn stance. Arrested, and then freed in 1990, he was in the greatest position of power to completely change Africa. But he did not do it with a vengeance. He did it with an open heart to his opponents. On the 27th of April, 1994, the first democratic multiracial elections took place. Nelson Mandela, who gained the respect of all the people, had won for his people the independence from the apartheid laws.

African Independence

Africa has been a center for conflict ever since Europe made desperate grabs for land during the mid 1800’s.

Africa first came under European influence in the Industrial Revolution, specifically during the Scramble for Africa, a period from 1881 to the early 1900’s. European settlers, in search of raw goods and market for their booming cities traveled to Africa. Countries like Britain, France, Belgium, Portugal, Germany, Italy, and Spain led different campaigns into lush African territory, with each carving up their own spheres of influence. They constructed harsh borders, which viciously cut off the interaction between the Africans, their cultures, and their resources. These European countries relied on their African territories for raw goods and industry all throughout the first part of the 20th century. However, it became apparent during and after World War II, that Imperialism was a dying cause for many countries. Especially Britain, who had suffered the mutinies of the Indians, began to see their control over their overseas colonies more as a problem than benefit. Several factors began to add up to convince the Africans to break the barriers created by the Europeans. Gandhi was a very influential example. When Gandhi had made his extraordinary exhibit of independence from Britain in BLAH, other subjects of Britain strove for their own independence. African veterans of the second World War stressed how Britain had consistently spoke about protecting freedom, so they theorized that they should fight for their native land’s freedom too.

In the 1950’s, the Africans were ready for change. The feeling was there, but the ultimate success of this could not have been possible without the collaborative efforts of the people and various leaders. Taking cues from Mahatma Gandhi, was Kwame Nkrumah. He and his followers were greatly inspired by the non-violent protest values of the Indian leader, and applied it in gaining their own independence. He applied passive-aggressive methods to convince his controllers to free his people. He organized protests and boycotts, which tallied up positive results. In 1957, he had won Gold Coast’s independence, making it the first African country to liberate itself from Britain. It was named Ghana, after the great African empire that had once existed there. He wanted to rebuild the entire Africa as an “United States of Africa.” In doing so, he put forth rigorous plans to develop Ghana, but mostly importantly provided for neighboring African nations. This crippled the country financially, and when the army seized over the weakness of country, it has since then swayed between military and domestic control.

Another revolutionist of the African freedom movement was Jomo Kenyatta. He and the Mau Mau (who acted separately) were the leading forces in freeing the Northern highlands of Kenya from their white opposition. It was a rural community compromised of farmers. The Mau Mau, utilizing a form of terrorism, scared the farmers out of the region. Because of his alleged involvement with the Mau Mau, he was arrested, but then released in 1960 at the forceful request of the Kenya African National Union. 1963 was the year Kenya saw independence, and Kenyatta became its president.
The map provided on the blog page and the text book vividly addresses the explosion of European owned colonies into full-fledged nations. In only twenty years, the entire face of Africa had morphed into a new existence. Many African leaders have taken a role in the movement towards a new Africa, and like the map shows, virtually all had ended in success.

9th Grade Review -=- The Neolithic Revolution

The modern world owes itself for the revolution that turned the world on its head, the Neolithic Revolution. What did the Neolithic revolution do for us? It introduced to us the concept of civilization. All the cities and the communities you see around you today are a result of the millions of years of evolution of the human populous’ psyche. Though many historians argue that this change to civilized societies was inevitable, the bare bones of the revolution remain static.

Before the revolution, there were Nomads. Nomads are people who lived off the land (hunters and gathers basically), who relied on animal game and fruits and berries for their food source. They change their home seasonally, usually with the movements of their game. When food was scarce, either they resorted to attacking other nomad communities to restock their supplies, or they just changed their location again until a sufficient source was found. They harnessed simple tools, and most of which were designed especially for hunting. This era was called the Paleolithic Age. Humans lived this way since the dawn of their existence until 10,000 BC, when humanity took a u-turn. In 10,000 BC, mankind had discovered agriculture. They became able to grow food, virtually wherever they wanted. Now they no longer had to aimlessly search for food, because they’d be able to create it in a place they found suitable. They didn’t have to travel anymore, because their food would always stay in one place. It was from this simple innovation that the first civilizations would sprout from.

The Neolithic Revolution was not an immediate change. In fact, it took nearly one million years for communities of people to discover, and then perfect this new way of living. On top of that, the communities did not learn this all at the same time; depending on their geographical location, some individuals gained the knowledge of agriculture sooner than others. In the end however, all the people of the world had learned about the agrarian way of life.

The revolution’s introducing of the sedentary way of life brought various changes to the active lives of the nomads. Whole communities began to revolve around the new technology that was agriculture. They built settlements by sites for growing crops, since they did not need to move anymore. They produced the crops native to their area, and after years of testing to see which produced the most yields, they’d establish their staple crop. This advancement into the realm of farming signals the beginning of the sedentary lifestyles that the people of the world live in today. Of course, this sedentary lifestyle encouraged the development of individual roles in a community. Before, during the Paleolithic Age, jobs were the same among men and woman; typically the men hunted, and the women gathered. However, the growth of civilized communities also brought the beginning of a structured society and specialized jobs. For farming, new tools were needed. To keep their settlement safe from outsiders, they needed new weapons. To keep the settlement under control, they needed a leader. It was these basic necessities that the people developed the first civilizations from. The first jobs were created, and for the first time it was not the exact same between genders. Varieties of jobs became available as the needs of the people increased (ex Clothe weavers, artisans, warriors, etc). It also called for the need of a government, or a way to maintain the people. Early societies made use of a “Chief Elder,” who would be advised by his subordinates, a “Council of Elders.” Only those with high merit would be allowed to lead the people.

The Neolithic Revolution also had a significant effect on the human race itself. First, it increased the birth rate. Food was usually no longer a problem for people, and with an abundance of food, mothers were healthier, thus babies being born healthier. The closed communities also fostered the growth of children because their food source was always their, unlike during the time of the nomads that food had to be fought for. Theoretically, the number of people born would have risen exponentially, but because of these communities, new problems arose. Famine, disease, war between rivaling settlements, and natural disasters became the biggest threat for people. But besides that, the people were able to grow. Second, it increased life span. Again, the food surplus allowed people to live healthy, and prolonged their life. The limiting factors like famine and etc. helped to curb the population to a safe level. In times that overpopulation occurred, people died as the food become more and more scarce; when the rate of which food was grown / found became greater than or equal to the rate the people consumed them, the communities returned to the normal state. Third, and last, the Neolithic brought us to control our own evolution. Humans during the Paleolithic age evolved with their environment, taking whatever nature threw at them, and becoming stronger against it. But the Neolithic revolution encouraged something else. WE took control over nature. Instead of using our body for everything, we relied on technology to do it for us. We brought our own evolution through technology. I can’t prove the following opinion, but maybe, the Neolithic revolution might have been a u-turn for the worst because we are hindering our bodies to evolve as it should with the earth; relying on technology, which is essentially one of the things brought to existence by the revolution, could make us too weak in the future if this technology were to be taken away from us.

The European Union

Anybody who has studied global history can readily agree on this one fact: Europe has always been a hot spot for conflict. But, the conflict between its members had never been on such a large scale until the mid-1800 and towards the end of the Second World War. And so, they all made up. The European Union (EU) was first developed as a way to maintain an economic relationship between the coal and steel producers of Europe. From this harmless, simple start, it gained success, and expand further. It outgrew its self, and now not only betwixt the members economically, but militarily, culturally, and even supported multi-national committees. The EU essentially (and almost ironically) became a spiritual clone of the United States.

The European Union shares many similarities with the U.S.A, making them a stark paragon. First off, it allows free-form traveling around the Union, much like the United States. Before, passports were required to enter and leave a nation, like how America requires a passport to enter of leave the country. But America doesn’t require a passport to move from state to state, does it? Nope, because they are all conjoined under the hood of the U.S. Likewise, the Union borrows this concept and applies it to Europe. Another similarity is the nonexistence of restrictive laws that say a citizen of one part of Europe cannot move to another. Present prior to the present, this was not possible. A citizen would generally stay in their own country because of the amass of “special papers or permission,” which they’d need to just work somewhere else. The other similarity is that now because of their amazing growths in economy and various assorted factors, they’ve become a world power. The U.S. had a short time to savor its time above all the world as the only world power in 1991, but them they were forced to slide over a bit soon as the European Union entered the scene.

Economically, the EU has become a sort of rival for the U.S. Euro, the currency of the Union, is now the most widely used currency in the world, and its value continues to trump that of the once favorable American dollar. So now, as market is easy for the United States, it has been reached for the European Union.

It was inferred over and over. The European has brought little else than multitudes of benefits. It has united the warring people of Europe, who for centuries on end had been entangled in agonizing conflict. It brought the nations of Europe together under a secure parliament, like how the U.S. has managed peace over its own states. It even has developed its unique military, most likely including soldiers from all the nations part of the EU. Most importantly, it has stopped conflict. Maybe they were just tired off all this fighting, or perhaps they realized that a relationship with each other would benefit them both, while also promoting peace. Whatever its justification, it has ultimately won over the peace of Europe that hasn’t been present for years upon end.

Film Lesson - The Right Stuff

The Space Race, similar to the many other ”races” occurring between the US and the USSR, was the central theme behind the 1983, award winning film, The Right Stuff. This particular race was a competition during the Cold War, between the two leading world powers to outplay the other in creating the more superior space technology; the first goal of the two nations was to first develop a capable aircraft, and then launch the first human into space, as was depicted in the movie. The film touched very lightly on the Cold War itself, but all its inferences were made quite visible through the fierce competition between the former allies in World War II.

The U.S. and the USSR were competing to dominate the other in several fields during the Cold War. From politics, to ideology, to military, and to science, these two nations duked it out on each other, neither dropping out. The Right Stuff focuses on the Space Race, the struggle between the two world powers to dominate humankind’s newest frontier: space. The movie showed numerous attempts on the American side to produce the first rocket. But first, they started miniscule. It was implied in the movie that the first they need to do was break the sound barrier. Attempts were made before, but the main character of the story, one of the greatest pilots in the world, managed to pull it off. Fast forward a bit, and now America was creating its first vessels. Unfortunately, most of the first rockets sort of exploded, or fell under their own weight. The Russians were quick to beat them, launching the first object into space, the Sputnik, complete with footage on the groundbreaking event. The Americans quickened up their game after hearing (and seeing) the news. In time, we were able to launch a monkey into space. But then the Russians beat them again, this time launching a human into space. America trailed behind, and finally won over Russia when we were the first to land a human onto the moon. “It isn’t over until the fat lady sings” would be a good expression for this battle for space, since the Russians seemed to have dominated us through most of the race, until we stepped up and won over them in the end.

Many of the scenes in the movie were portrayed the actual event in a more comical light. For example, the government meetings in America to discuss what they would do to counteract the Soviet advances seemed more like a comedy than a serious event (which I would think it was). It was probably true to fact though, which is what counts. The two scenes that showed the government conference will help me to remember this Cold War event because its abstractness, and the abstractness of the official’s ideas really proved how desperate the U.S. were to outmatch their rival in space technology. Another scene, played three times I’m pretty sure, was the black and white film grain footage of the man who had invented the rocket, standing in a cloud of smoke in his own successful invention. Oddly, this gave me chills. Seeing this from the point of view of a member of the government in 1957, I would have been fear-stricken and angry. I’d probably think “Damnit! They got ahead of us?!,” and some other stuff that I don’t want to put here, but the point gets across. This will definitely help me to remember the space race and Cold War because of the sheer emotion that I imagined the senators / congressman of the meeting probably felt.

Cuban Missle Crisis

The world had never been closer to an apocalyptic end than in 1962, the time when “Nuclear catastrophe was hanging by a thread ... and we weren't counting days or hours, but minutes.” Like other catastrophic events in history, this crisis did not begin without a prelude of quick motions on the state of the world. When World War II ended, the world was left in shock and awe: the most deadly weapon to grace human existence was manifested in America, and used almost insignificantly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Thereafter, the world trembled. However, not all the fear-stricken nations were completely powerless. The Soviet Union, allied with the Americans during the war, had achieved the same as their former allies: the production of their own nuclear bomb. Now with these two countries placed at the highest pedestals in the world, both competed with each other to surpass the other. The rest of the world could do little but watch. Western Europe, fearing the unparalleled force of the Soviet’s, created an organization with America to insure its security. The Soviets did likewise, forming an alliance with its adjuvant nations. The bitter tension between America and the Soviets bore holes into the psyche of its members and citizens, giving the signature name to this period in history, the Cold War. Consequently, in the early 1960’s the Cold War had almost exploded into a full-scale war, one which could destroy whole nations. It could have been the first nuclear war.

The center of the crisis was Cuba. Having just recovered from an overthrowing of the government, its new leader (dictator actually, Fidel Castro, issued numerous changes to the way of life in Cuba. Though from a reading standpoint most of these reforms seemed beneficial to the people, there were a select few that left the Caribbean island and into Florida, in the U.S. When the press heard of the stories told by the immigrants, America took a stand against their close neighbor. This led to the Americans deciding on an invasion of Cuba. The attempt to bypass the shores of Cuba, in the famed battle, the Bay of Pigs, was a complete failure. Castro theorized that a successive attack would not entirely out of the question. To protect his nation, he sought the help of Khrushchev, the Soviet Leader, who made an offer to install ICBMS (Inter-continental Ballistic Missiles) onto the island. The plan was that the missiles would remove any thought of invasion from U.S. The plan was soon carried out in mid-1962, setting the steps that would bring the Cold War to its highest peak.

The day was October 15th, 1962. A U-2 spy plane (nicknamed the Dragon Lady), a one man plane developed by the United States in 1957, hovered over Cuban airspace, which was a normal practice. However, a striking set of recon photographs revealed that Cuba had something going on without there noticing, until now. The aerial photos revealed a hive of missile bases planted across the borders of the island, and a few inland. However, this was not entirely new news. A recon photograph taken on September 4th, 1962, revealed that missile bases were being constructed in Cuba; however, they were non-offensive missiles. Twelve days later on September 16th, more U-2 revelations showed that materials, equipment, and missiles were being ported to Cuba for the construction of bases. It was becoming obvious then that there was a threat coming, but it wasn’t until the 15th of October that it was confirmed the Soviet missiles were present in Cuba.

This terrifying news was not revealed to the president until the next day at 9 a.m. He immediately assembled a group of his most trusted advisers. This group was named the Executive Committee of National Security Council, or ExComm for short. They and President Kennedy developed three ways to try to halt the crisis, but seven days after the news of the missiles, the one decide on by the members was posing a blockade on Cuba, which was less likely to start any all out conflict. It was on this seventh day that it was revealed to the public that Cuba had nuclear ICBMs, which could cause unparalleled destruction in the states. Kennedy declared to the Soviet Union that a launch of any of the missiles would be labeled an attack on America, so he demanded that the Soviets withdraw their nuclear weapons from Cuba. On October 27th, a U-2 plane was shot down over Cuba. ExComm received two letters from Khrushchev that day. One negotiated that if they were to remove their ballistic missiles from Cuba, America would remove their missiles from Turkey. The other negotiated that if America were to promise not to invade Cuba, they would dismantle their missiles. Kennedy, after heavy discussion, took the latter. However on October 28th, the Soviets removed their missiles, despite that they chose to follow the second letter. The Americans complied with the Soviets, also retracting their missiles in Turkey.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was definitely the highest peak of the Cold War. Millions of people’s lives teetered on the edge of death. Any mistake or misconception in negotiation could have marked the end of two great nations. For a week, the world rested on the shoulders of the leaders of the two most powerful nations in the world at the time, the US, and the USSR. Then, the people became notified on this catastrophe seven days after the conflict started, just when the tension began to burst the world apart. Can you imagine the fear these people had to face for the week that followed? Where would we be had these leaders not reached a “peaceful” settlement on the crisis?

NATO and The Warsaw Pact

The U.S. was the first nation to create the atomic bomb. The U.S. was the first nation to use the atomic bomb. The U.S. seemed to control the entire fate of the inferior world after the close of World War II. They held the most controversial, and devastating weapon ever known to man at their fingertips. It only took an order, and any city could be wiped from existence. But, what do you think happens when another nation successfully tested its own atomic bomb? Most would assume war, but thankfully that wasn’t the case: in its place, was a cold tension between possessors of the deadly weapon. Neither side dared to make a move, because if one were to act with their bombs, the other would do likewise. This tension soon became a fierce rivalry and competition between nations to become the greatest, in fields such as industry, technology (like the Space Race), military, and ideology. Hence the tension and war of ideals, but no physical conflict, the term “Cold War” has been most widely accepted among historians.


The Cold War saw the creation of two organizations, both of which dealt with their member’s security. The first to be formed was NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Actually, NATO didn’t exactly begin as the “NATO” we know: it was actually the Western European Union. It technically began with the signing of the Dunkirk Treaty in March 4th, 1947, providing a mutual relationship between signed nations; the primary purpose of the treaty was to protect the nations in case the Germans were to break the economic and militaristic limitations placed on them and take a second stab at controlling Europe. A year later, on March 17th, 1948, an abridged version of the Dunkirk Treaty was written and signed. It was called the Treaty of Brussels, and its main highlight was the creation of an organization called the Brussels Treat Organization, soon to become known as the Western European Union. Its signatories included the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxemburg. Similar to the alliances formed in World War I, the Treaty of Brussels created the outline that if a nation were to attack any of the allied nations, the members of the organization would come together to support and defend their comrade. When the USSR’s power became more and more prevalent in the east, the nations of the Western European Union did not fear the Germans nearly as much as they had previously. As Europe had done in the preamble to World War I, it had subconsciously divided into two camps: the Soviet Union, and Western Europe. Western Europe were not capable in their current state to hope to resist the soviets, so they turned to the next nation who had about as much power as their opposition: the U.S. The U.S. itself feared the developments in the Soviet Union as well, so they were quick to accept the negotiations made by Britain. To include America, and also Canada into their union, a new treaty was written. This was the North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washing, DC 1949, and giving rise to NATO.

There were numerous objectives that the NATO was designed to resolve and fulfill. Its most important was providing a mutual security for all its members. If a nation were to lead a sudden attack against any of the nations secured by NATO, the rest of the NATO nations would become a coalition against the aggressor. This became increasingly important as the Cold War progressed, because the Soviet Union’s military power was expanding at an alarming rate, to a point that it almost matches the power of the United States. Another purpose of the NATO was expressed through the Marshal Plan, an operation that outlined how Western Europe would be restored after the devastation of World War II. The restoration of the ruined countries helped for the relationship between the allied nations to level out, allowing them to become more accustomed with their allies. The last purpose of NATO was to prevent the spread of the Soviet’s communism into surrounding estates.

The Soviets did not sit and watch as Western Europe joined together to impede the spread of communism. For the five years after NATO’s initiation, the Soviets had viewed the organization as a threat to their security, but when NATO had accepted Western Germany into the organization through the Paris Peace Treaties on May 9th, 1955, they moved swiftly to form their own alliance. On May 14th, 1955, in Warsaw, Poland, the second alliance of the Cold War was established through the Warsaw Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance (shortened to Warsaw Pact). Its members included the Soviet Union (who exerted the most control over the alliance) and its satellite nations, Poland, Bulgaria, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Albania. Nikita Khrushchev and Nikolay Bulganin, the newly elected leaders of the Soviet Union, took advantage of this time to position troops within the satellite nations to empower their authority their.

Film Lesson: Night and Fog

Night and Fog was a chilling documentation of the most dangerous death camp built by the Germans in 1940, Auschwitz. Contrary to Schindler's List by Steven Spielberg, this documentary depicted a more domestic view of the concentration camp, and also provide more facts that cleared the image of the death camp. The movie, directed by Alain Resnais in 1956, was critically acclaimed, received several awards, and nominations.

The documentary held some very graphic and depressing scenes. But unlike Schindler’s List, these were all real footage. Everything we saw in this documentary was the real Auschwitz, the actual place were the mass genocide of the Jews took place. This sole fact made the film even more chilling. What we were looking at was Auschwitz. Now, without having to visualize, I could faintly imagine what life there could’ve been like. Barbed fences, with electricity coursing through it at all times would keep you inside day and night. Each and every day of your life there, you would wake up in cold wooden bunks with others sleeping in the same exact bunks, just to be senselessly killed by the Germans. Though outside, the camp seemed like a small town: it had a hospital, showers, etc. But these weren’t what they seemed. The showers did not disperse water. They dispersed Cyanide. People were led to believe they were showers, being that when they first entered the camp, they actually normal showers! But that was all part of the German’s insanity. When the Jews walked in, they would scramble to achieve the highest ground away from the gas. They would fight so much for high ground that deep nail marks and scratches were drawn across the ceiling. However, none would escape. They would all die, in a single room filled with showerheads. And then came the hospitals. I would rather work in the camps than land myself in the hospital. Despite the assuring look of the facility, it was the home of sickening amputations and experiments on the Jews. Some lost their arms, legs, and fertility, as a result of the crude experiments. Some lost their lives.

The scenes in this documentary were very different from that of Schindler’s List. The Hollywood movie featured more dramatic scenes to convey the terror felt by the Jews when the German’s invaded their homes and sent them to the Ghetto, and then the death camps. It also emphasized the German’s emotionless killing. Especially in the liquidation of the Jewish ghetto scene, there was a handful amount of senseless, and open killing, where the sick, elderly, the children, and those who opposed the Germans were shot down without a care. In Night and Fog, the director used cold hard fact over dramatization of fact to illustrate the extent of the German madness.

While the documentary was powerful, I think that its Hollywood counterpart illustrated the Holocaust best. The documentary only gave its viewers a study of the concentration camps, and avoided going in depth with how the Jews ended up in the camps (which is also a crucial part of the Holocaust). The latter showed the Jews, before, and during their time inside the concentration camps. It showed how these Jews were stripped from their homes and families, right before their eyes. The movie utilized heavy gore and death to express to the viewers that the Germans were not joking. They really wanted the Jews dead. It allows the viewers to sympathize more with the unfortunate Jews, because seeing their lives taken away before their eyes in a gory blood bath is enough for one to really think what made their killers so inhumane to do such a thing.

I can honestly say that I found Night and Fog as powerful as the director most likely intended it to be. What really made this documentary so powerful is that everything was real. It showed the real Auschwitz. It showed footage of the captives in Germany’s most devastating death camp. It had footage of the allies going into the camp and plowing all the bodies in clumps from the field as if it had just snowed. Though it did not cover the entire span of the Holocaust as Schinlder’s List did, it still packed all the emotional influence of the Hollywood movie into a short 30 minutes, and made the absolute best of it. Using fact, it showed what the death camps were truly like. It showed the truth.

Film Lesson: Schindler's List

Schindler’s List, directed by Steven Spielberg in 1993, portrays a harsh, remorseless account of the Holocaust.

The scene that was the most powerful for me was when the Nazis were taking away the children. They did it so simply. They led them out with what seemed to be a children’s nursery rhyme, while they all sang along and marched with the soldiers. While all the adults where elsewhere in the camp, the Nazis then loaded the children into several trucks, and closed the trunk once full. And that was it. There was no killing. No bloodshed, and little hassle in the operation (except for the few who ran away). The Nazis were about to begin to move the trucks, when the adults were moved into the dirt field a couple of meters away from the entrance. And there in front of them, were the children. The kids didn’t seem to have a care; they looked as if nothing was wrong, even though everything was horribly wrong. The trucks roared, and the kids were off, waving goodbye. A riot broke out in the group of adults, and they all went running for their children. But the children didn’t have a clue. They continued to wave goodbye while their parents were running and making a desperate attempt to save them. But all was lost. The trucks had already been driven past the gate. Without a care, the children were lulled into thinking they were ok. Their future was lost to the Nazis. This was a very powerful scene, because it comes to show how cruel the Germans were. They took away all the children like taking candy from a baby. They took away the future of the Jews. And what did the children do? Nothing. They were fooled so precisely, and got them into thinking it were just some normal trip. But only history knows what happened after: they were killed. Led away from their parents, and killed. A plain and lucid plan that resulted in the death of all those children is hard to imagine, and depressing when you realize that it was performed with perfect precision.

Another part of the movie that was very emotional was the scenes with the girl in red. In the midst of the liquidation of the ghetto comes a small blonde girl dressed in red, in contrast to the black and white world that surrounds her. Innocent and naïve, she walked the streets of the ghetto while Germans were gunning the Jews down left and right. In all this turmoil, she walks alone. She comes to an apartment, slips inside, and hides herself under a bed, fearing the ferocious soldiers outside. Time passes, and the scene soon comes to Schindler looking at the Germans cremating all of the bodies of the ghetto, to destroy the evidence that a mass murdering had happened. Nameless bodies are all moved in wheelbarrows to a burning pile of Jews, with black soot covering their ragged bodies. Then another cart comes. In it are nameless corpses, and a little girl with a red dress, dead. Her clothes were dirty, dusted, much like the corpses next to her, and her hair was in a messy clump. Indifferently, she is placed on the ramp to be incinerated. I found this to be the most emotional scene of all because it was like she was a representative of the burden held by all of the Jews. She was a little girl, with aspirations to grow up and become something great, just like everyone else. She was an individual with a family, friends, and a place to call home. She had done nothing wrong, and yet, she and the people she knew were being ruthlessly killed before her eyes. Her life ended abruptly, symbolizing how the Jews had everything taken away from them, when they still had so much more to give.

Some of the images that will always stay with me were the brutal deaths of the Jews. For example, when a Jewish engineer tried to advise the German of an error in the construction of a facility, they shot her down through her head. Her head pummeled to the earth with such a force that she bounced back up and landed on her side. Another killing that was memorable (in a bad way) was when a young man tried to run from the formation of Jews. One German soldier attempted at firing at him, but they all missed. Two other soldiers chased after him, and caught him when he was about twenty-five feet away. They dragged him by the arms back to the line of Jews, and another soldier shot him square in the chest when he was only about fifteen feet away. An odd sort of dust mixed with blood spurted out of him, and he fell limp in the two Germans’ arms.

U.S. Atomic Bombing of Japan in 1945

SIRS Knowledge Source Article

Yes, I agree with the article that says the loosing the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is the no. 1 story of this century. Consider where we are in the world today. Because of our creation of the weapon, and making two chilling demonstrations of its power, other nations have taken liberty upon themselves to make it as well, so that they would not become inferior on a global comparison. Only about forty years ago, the tension created by the major imbalance of power due to the atomic bombs almost jumped into another war, except it narrowly avoided. This was the Cold War, a sort of look into what could eventually happen in the future: an all-out nuclear war.
And now, because of us (the U.S) seven other nations now posses nuclear weapons; these nations include Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France, India, Pakistan, and North Korea (who had assembled their bomb just recently). The atomic bombs are still a center of conflict today, because the U.S.'s initial reason for entering Iraq was to disarm all supposed nuclear weapons and their plants. But the fact that a full-scale conflict hasn’t erupted yet since the Cold War is amazing in itself. But peace doesn’t last. I that that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki set in motion something that humankind will have to suffer in too soon a time, let alone the number of people who have already suffered immensely from it. The bombs were truly a first: it wiped out a complete city in a few seconds flat, it introduced to us death by radiation, and most importantly, it introduced chemical warfare (which is becoming more and more common in the arsensal of military weapons today). Honestly, I cannot think of a news story that has such an enormous effect worldwide as this event has.

While the list propagated is mostly accurate, I would like to change a few things around. “The first mass market personal computers” at 31 should be moved to no. 10, because now, computers run in the background of companies and small businesses alike, and also in our daily life. Having a computer that fills an entire room and weighs a ton would not be sufficient at all for everyday use. But, in 1977, the first personal computer made it possible to downsize the originally enormous computer into something anyone can access.

Another list item that should change is “Deadly AIDS disease identified. 1981”, placed at 25. This item should be placed around 15 because it is a deadly disease that since it discovery has been racking the world, especially in the poorer, less fortunate countries. Plus, it is thus far an incurable disease, leaving many infected victims to die a guaranteed death.

Germany at War - WWII

Propaganda - Propaganda is a class of advertising that commonly involves either the degrading or enhancing of the image of the intended target, through fact, opinion, and/or rumor.

The above propaganda, created by the Nazi Political Party in Germany in 1941, was likely created in order to promote their campaign through the Soviet Union. I believe this for several reasons. The most obvious and prominent indication is the strong caricature of Joseph Stalin, dictator of the Soviet Union, and the giant armored fist that has already punched Stalin with an uppercut (so it seems). The fist is a simple symbol representing the German Army, and the fact that it is armored shows its strength and power over the other. The fist’s size also contributes to the overall view of the German Army, since it occupies a considerable portion of Europe (from the picture, it seems to be over Poland, and France). Another reason is the contrast in colors of the nations at war. Most of Europe is depicted in a faint yellow color, representative of Germany. Britain, however, is faded and brown, with an emphasized cross reading “W CHURCHILL”, pointing to the fact that Britain has fallen, or possibly that its death is inevitable. However, there are marks of red on Britain, suggesting that it has taken hits from Germany already. But note how the island to the left of Britain is also yellow, which probably means that Germany did not wish to control Britain, but it did want control over the island next to it. Then comes the Soviet Union, whose nation is represented by the red color signature to the soviets. While the rest of Europe is in yellow, under Germany’s control, the Soviet Union is the only that hasn’t been conquered. The poster justifies all of the imagery mentioned with the three objects within Germany’s territory, behind the fist. These are a baby’s cradle, a factory, and a farmland. The baby’s cradle is symbolic of life in Germany, and the security of its people. The factory’s symbolism is clear: it is the industry of Germany. And the last is the farmland, symbolic of Germany’s general prosperity and land. Because food is often seen as critical aspect for success in any civilization, it capitalized in this poster with the farmland symbolism. The fact that these icons are placed behind the fist might indicate that these are what make the foundation of the purpose of Germany’s Army in invading the Soviet Union.

What wraps up the entire poster into one central theme is the quote at the bottom of the poster, which reads “Europas sieg dein wohlstand”. This translates to “Of Europe’s victory your prosperity”, which basically refers to Germany, since Europe happens to be all under its hold. If Germany were to defeat the Soviet Union, which is the goal of the Germany Army, it would result in greater security, more land, more food, and more industry.

The Treaty of Versailles (ended WWI)

World War I was the first conflict to encompass various major and minor nations from all segments of the world. The two opposing forces, the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente, shed casualties for four years until 1918, when an armistice was signed. It was the armistice signed in the Compiegn Forest in France that ended the conflict, but what truly brought in the after effects of the war was the Treaty of Versailles. Major nations all reached the conclusion that Germany was the central cause of the war, and therefore had to pay full responsibility for all its actions of hostility towards the other nations.

The Treaty of Versailles, reluctantly signed by Germany, forced them to take complete responsibility for the war. Many of the effects of this Treaty on Germany were regarded towards territorial losses, however, others were regarded also towards its economy. Territorial loses include Alsace-Lorraine, which was given back to France after it had lost it during the Franco-Prussian War in 1871. Other territorial losses included its overseas colonies from pre-world war I, which severely reduced its general size and profit income. The northern portion Schlieswig was also lost and returned back to Denmark; it had originally lost it in 1864 during the Second War of Schleswig. The remainder of the overseas colonies were partitioned between the members of the League of Nations. At the end of all territorial losses, Germany's total area was reduced by 13%.

Among the other punishments issued to Germany for starting the war was the reduction of the size of Germany’s army and navy. The treaty set a very strict limitation of 100,000 infantry. Along with this, they were not allowed to produce an artillery or armed vehicles, including tanks, battleships, submarines, supply carriers, ranged artillery, or aircraft.

It was the mix of these effects in Germany help to further fuel a growing revolution in Germany at the time, the German Revolution. Supported by various historians, I also think that the results of the war and the Treaty of Versailles helped carve the way to Adolf Hitler and Fascism. The citizens of Germany did not take their humiliating loss too lightly. Before the war, Germany looked down on all the other European nations, believing that theirs was superior (nationalism), and this was actually true before 1914. But, after the war, people became displeased with their country, and turned to resenting the nations who defeated them (already setting some of the stage for World War II). On top of this, Germany was in an extremely weakened state: not only did they lose huge sums of money from war expenses alone, they lost money to compensate for causing the war, and also had their military reduced. Ex-German soldiers (those removed from the army as a result of the treaty) did not wish to be taken away from the fighting so forcefully, so multiple independent mercenary groups became active all over the nation; one of larger of these mercenary groups was the Freikorps.

However, though all these provisions were set against Germany by the majority of the European nations, ironically, Germany was not present at that meeting. Therefore, it can be said that this Treaty was very unfair.The reparations decided by the Big Three(Woodrow Wilson (U.S), David Lloyd George (Britain), and Georges Clemenceau (France)) added up to 6,000 million British pounds, an extremely unfair cost.

Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) and the Modernization of Turkey

Mustafa Kemal is viewed as being the father of Turkey, similarly to how Mahatma Gandhi is respected as being the father of India. His plan of action was firs expressed to the public in the Bursa Speech. In his speech, he gave a simplistic outline of his ultimate goal, saying that “…our nation with its true qualities deserves and will become civilized and progressive.”

The first of these reforms, and one he emphasized primarily through his beginning stages, was clothing. He believed that clothing was a mark of civilization, and a certain one present with their country was harming them rather than helping. This piece of clothing was the Fez. Symbolic of the hardships and slavery of the past, Kemal believed that without it, Turkey would be able to become a greater nation. He ordered that now, brimmed hats must be worn, and dress clothing (ties, suits, etc) must be worn as casual clothes. This marked the start of Mustafa’s secularity, because it showed his willingness to break religious order to achieve a certain goal for his nation.

One of these reforms was to the status of people. Mustafa did not want to abide any longer the ideals of the past, where people were set into strict social orders, and personal movement was not encouraged, if not virtually impossible. Much like Japan during the Meiji Era, Kemal embraced the western style of society, and posed a new structure for his people to follow. He borrowed from Europe the theory of a classless, non-hierarchical society. He wished to break away from the class driven chains that Turkey had been caught in for so long, so he gave equal rights to all the citizens of Turkey, which included the freedom to practice any religion, and a formal education for all those who wished to enroll. He also stemmed an original form of education that based itself on individual’s skills; depending on a person’s job, they may be taught in the general areas of education, but also many side subjects to help sharpen the individual’s performance in the job (ex: a waiter learning economics for general knowledge, but also etiquette so that the job may be done properly).

Ultimately, all of the changes produced by Kemal increased the secularity of the Turkey. Secular is defined as “of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred.”

Film Lesseon: Gandhi

Mahatma Gandhi was one of he most influential figures of all history. Leading a bloodless revolution across Africa, he was one of the very few fathers of nations who fought for independence for his people without violence. From 1916 to 1945, Gandhi continued to challenge the British authority over the “coolies”, as the British called Indians, until the formation of the creation of India and Pakistan in BLAH. In the accurate biography about his astonishing life, titled “Gandhi”, various of Mahatma’s methods and his philosophy were revealed and brought to a more public light.

The first of the methods used by Gandhi was civil disobedience. This is a practice of resisting an an unjust rule by means of strikes, boycotting, and general neglection of that law. However, while Gandhi did encourage this, he told his followers not to lay a single hand on the British, and to take every one of their blows. His view was most accurately portrayed in the movie during the scene of part of the Salt March. He organized a group of rebel Indians, and marched them to a British salt factory in the desert. However, British officers assembled at the site, and brutally clubbed many Indians.

Gandhi also practiced a sort of "self-sufficient" lifestyle. He encouraged his people to follow his example of spinning their own cloth, obtaining / making their owns goods, and boycotting British made products. This self-sufficiency goes hand in hand with his tactic of civil disobedience. This method turned successful, as many people followed his example. In the movie, the self-sufficiency of Gandhi is most clearly portrayed in the scene of the Salt March, where the Indians travel hundreds of miles to reach the ocean so that they could make their own salt instead of having to depend on the British for it.

I believe that the gaining of India's independence was not all Gandhi. It is true that he played an extremely influential role in it, but there was another invisible hand moving along with Gandhi: the loss of power in their colonies after the close of World War II. Europe, and the entire world for that matter, was devastated by the amass of losses, both in revenue, lives, and overall power. At that state, they weren't able to maintain all of their overseas colonies, as it would deplete their desperately needed resources. Gandhi happened to come in at the perfect time. He and his non-violence methods did not hurt the British physically, but indirectly through money. The crippled British became tripped deeper into weakness, and had to allow India their freedom. However, India's independence was inevitable, because the results of World War II had already weakened the British enough that it would not be in their best wishes to try to keep their colonies active.