Benito Mussolini of the National Fascist Party of Italy had the least drastic impact on Minorities. He did begin to restrict the rights of Jews in 1939 and round them up in accordance with the actions of his German fascist allies as the war progressed. However the treatment of minorities in Italy pales in comparison to other states, where their restriction and destruction was either much greater, such as under Adolf Hitler, or was carried on for much longer, such as under Mao Zedong. Meanwhile in Italy there were no death camps, and minorities were only sent to German camps after the Germans occupied Italy in 1943. This source is valuable as it was created in 2010, many years after Mussolini's rule in Italy had ended, meaning the impact of his actions had reached their resolution and could therefore be studied. It is also valuable as its aim is to discuss revisionist historians views and therefore reevaluate the evidence of the past with a more objective eye. The source is limited as it was created by the New York Times which is a press organisation, not an educational one. Due to this the source may include inaccuracies as the writers are not experts in the subject of history.
Overall, Adolf Hitler of the Nazi Party of Germany had the greatest impact on minorities, the most shocking example being the use of death camps, starting in 1941, to eradicate those deemed minority groups under German control such as Jews, the disabled, homosexuals, communists and gypsies, leading to millions of deaths of those minorities. Not all of this impact was directly negative however, as under the Nazis, women were given an honored position in the family, although this did mean they were barred from work in order to produce more strong germans for the regime. Marriages were given loans if the wife gave up her job and by 1939 42% of marriages were loan assisted. This source is valuable as it was written for the purposes of education and so is unlikely to have exaggerated information regarding the rule of the Nazi party. Additionally, it is valuable because the scope of the source is specifically Authoritarian and Single Party States and so provides expert information for this topic. However the source is limited as it was produced by a Cambridge University Press in the British nation that fought against this state during WW2, meaning there may have been some ill will toward this single party state, possibly leading to an overemphasis of the cruelty of the Nazi regime.
Mussolini of the National Fascist Party had the least efficient methods used to establish control as although he effectively consolidated his power in government legally in the early years, a few key decisions made, meant he was never able to take absolute power. The first was that he was appointed by the King as the prime minister in 1922, meaning Mussolini owed him a debt as he legitimized the Fascist uprising, but leaving the King in power meant the Military and Navy had their primary loyalties elsewhere. The second was, the Church maintained their power over the people, despite Fascism taking hold, and once again Mussolini owed them a debt as in order to declare extraordinary powers he needed a coalition with the Catholic party. The values of this source are that it was written by John Pollard, a Professor of Modern European History and an expert historian on Italy under Mussolini and therefore his policies to establish control, and the source was written in 1998 when the full scope of Mussolini’s reign had played out and could be evaluated. The limitations of the source are that the purpose was to argue ‘The Limits of the Personality Cult in Fascist Italy’ and the sources and analysis was therefore not designed as a discussion of his ability to establish control and the effects of his decisions.
Saddam Hussein of the Ba’ath Party of Iraq had the most efficient methods used to establish control as as soon as he came into power in 1979 he began to purge those who were not loyal to him, executing hundreds of his opposition within his party by the end of 1979. He also maintained a regime of repression over the people, keeping them under constant surveillance with his secret police. However at the same time he also drastically improved living conditions and infrastructure which made him popular to the people, mostly because of his great economic success from finally nationalizing the oil industry in 1972 and taking it from the British. This book was written for the purpose of education by two history professors; William Cleveland and Martin Bunton and has an extensive academic bibliography, meaning it takes into account the broad amount of research written on the history of the Middle East and attempts to present it objectively. However the book was written on the subject of the Middle East across a very large scope, and not about Hussein specifically, and therefore studies in him the context of the Middle East, including his actions as a dictator, but not especially for them. Further, the views presented on his actions may have been affected by the cultural view of Saddam at the time seeing as he was executed in 2003 and it was written in 2006.
Mao Zedong of the Chinese Communist Party had the least favourable condition for Rise To Power as throughout his rise he was hunted and persecuted by the opposing party; the Guomindang or Nationalist party led by Jiang Kai Shek. This did aid his rise somewhat as he was able to use his survival from the long march in 1935 which started off with 500, 000 people and left 100, 000, to show that he was chosen as the leader. However the persecution meant the CCP was constantly as war, and during WW2 when they werent fighting the GMD, they were attempting to prevent Japan from taking control in China. The source is valuable as it is an original poster used under Mao’s reign over China, meaning it directly demonstrates how the Long March was used by Mao to increase his power and stimulate the development of a cult of personality around him. The source is limited as the specific origin of the source is unknown and therefore the information presented within it may be inaccurate. The source is also limited as it is propaganda and therefore the purpose was to present Mao and the Long March in a positive light, not to give an objective account of the time and the events.
Saddam Hussein of the Ba’ath Party of Iraq had the most favourable conditions for rise to power as although his party went through a struggle to come to power in 1968 by way of a military coup, what followed was 11 years of stability with his party in power, before he took presidency. This gave him the time and the means, as vice-chairman of the party, to increase his influence and power without opposition. During this time he took control of the security forces surrounding the party and promoted those who supported him on an individual level. This meant he was the only viable choice as al-Bakr’s successor when he stepped down, leading to Hussein’s Presidency. This book was written for the purpose of education by two history professors; William Cleveland and Martin Bunton and has an extensive academic bibliography, meaning it takes into account the broad amount of research written on the history of the Middle East and attempts to present it objectively. However the book was written on the subject of the Middle East across a very large scope, and not about Hussein specifically, and therefore studies in him the context of the Middle East, including his actions as a dictator, but not especially for them. Further, the views presented on his actions may have been affected by the cultural view of Saddam at the time seeing as he was executed in 2003 and it was written in 2006.
Benito Mussolini of the National Fascist Party of Italy had the least successful domestic policy as although he attempted to improve the nation’s economy he ended up desperate enough to go to war to distract the people from their economic troubles. During the 1920s his main policies all resulted in negative consequences. The Battle for Grain (1926) decreased imports but at the cost of other crops and largely crops failed in the southern soil unsuitable for wheat. The Battle for Lira increased the value of the Lira from 154 Lira to 90 Lira to the British pound, but this resulted in higher tariffs on imported goods. The values of this source are that it was written in 2015 by a university press. Due to this its purpose is one of education, meaning the facts are unlikely to be exaggerated and give an accurate view of the time. Additionally the time suggests that the source is unlikely to favour one side or another in it’s description of the move to World War Two. However it is this specificity on the move to global war that the source is limited, as it is through this lens that Mussolini’s policies have been selected, not as a representation of his rule as an authoritarian dictator.
Mustafa Ataturk Kemal of Turkey had the most successful domestic policies as he absolutely gained his aim of westernizing Turkey and creating Nationalism. This most compelling piece of evidence for this is shown in the image, Kemal’s language reform was a success as it gave the people an easier alphabet to learn, lessening illiteracy, and it created something uniquely Turkish for the people to unite around. Additionally it was latin-based and therefore more western. Not only that but he announced it in 1926 and then made it mandatory in 1928, just two years, and it is still used today. The policy also created a barrier between the younger and older generations meaning the younger generations were more likely to follow his ideals. This image is valuable as it was taken in 1928 during the height of Kemal’s power, this means that the it gives a direct view into his actions during that time. Additionally it is found on the Ataturk Society of America website which specifically holds information on Kemal’s policies, which is useful when determining whether he was the most successful. However the source is limited as although it gives direct insight, it may also have been affected by how Kemal wanted to present himself during his reign and have been staged. Additionally the website is not Turkish and therefore can only view his policies from a western point of view and may not understand the cultural impact.
Benito Mussolini of the National Fascist Party of Italy had the least Influential Cult of personality as although he did name himself ‘Il Duce’ and control his image in the media, he was never able to gain the influence with his cult that these other dictators had. This was due to the presence of powerful rivals in Italy, which these other dictators did not have. On the one hand there was the King Victor Emmanuel who controlled the loyalty of the army, and on the other hand there was the Catholic Church which controlled the faith of the people. Although Fascism did try to replace this faith with ‘Fascist Mysticism’ it never caught hold. The values of this source are that it was written by John Pollard, a Professor of Modern European History and an expert historian on Italy under Mussolini, and the source was written in 1998 when the full scope of Mussolini’s cult had played out and could be evaluated. The limitations of the source are that the purpose was to argue ‘The Limits of the Personality Cult in Fascist Italy’ and could therefore have ignored evidence that discredited the arguments made, the source is also limited as does not have a direct view into the cultural feeling toward Mussolini at the time, it can only work from what has been recorded.
Mao Zedong of China had the most influential cult of personality as using his god-like status and a vast amount of propaganda he was able to change the loyalties of those in China from their friends and even families to him. The power he held can clearly be seen in this article in which a son tells of how he accused his mother of denouncing the chairman, for which she was shot. There is a clear distinction between the power of his party, Chinese Communist Party and him, as during the Cultural Revolution the party often turned on each other, but never on him. This source is valuable as it was written in 2013, almost 40 years after the cultural revolution ended and Mao Zedong died, meaning there is no pressure to conform to the common ideals of worshiping Mao that was present at the time. Additionally it was written by an English newspaper, the Guardian, so they are not pushed by the Chinese culture to continue to revere Mao. The source is limited as the purpose of the newspaper is to get people to read the article and to sell the newspaper, therefore they may be encouraged to exaggerate the events. Furthermore its purpose is to incite sympathy for this son and not simply reporting on the time, meaning the evidence is not objective.