Describe the role of strong black leaders in the fight for racial equality and liberation. Were they presented in the media as something to be feared? Why or why not? What was the real threat? Compare and contrast the views and leadership styles of Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr..
Ripsman and Levy argue that Chamberlain adopted appeasement in order to buy time for Britain because the economy was not able to produce rapid rearmament. This was proven from Ripsmans and Levy’s book (Wishful Thinking) which noted the “British economy could not sustain the rapid and extensive rearmament effort” which was supported by the fact that all British leaders recognised that mass rearmament “lacked the economic strength” to make it successful. This was shown by Ripsman and Levy by the economy not having enough skilled workers to produce rapid rearmament, such as from using government statistics they showed that three million people were unemployed which was an indication that due to high unemployment Britain did not have enough skilled workers to get rearmament done therefore pushing Chamberlain to adopt appeasement. Unlike Charmley, Ripsman and Levy tend to focus more on internal problems within Britain which were hindering their chance of pursuing other alternatives, in comparison to Charmley’s argument of alliances being Britain’s main reason for appeasement. Given the fact that post-revisionists had a better hindsight of the events which occurred due to their writing in 1990, meant that their claims would have been more reliable as they provided a balanced view of Chamberlain’s successes and faults, in comparison to Orthodox and Revisionist historians who’s argument was based on a particular belief. However not all post-revisionists shared the same beliefs about Chamberlain as Ripsman and Levy did, for example, R.A.C Parker, another post-revisionist historian goes on to criticise Chamberlain on not pursuing an alliance with the USSR. This was highlighted from Parker’s book Chamberlain and appeasement, where he mentions that “collaboration with the Soviet Union was undesirable”. This shows that Chamberlain restricted Britain’s chance to form an alliance due to his own beliefs rather than seeing Russia as an invaluable ally against Germany, also RAC Parker stresses that Chamberlain failed to realise that Russia could indeed combine with Germany or form an alliance which would have caused even more tensions throughout Europe. For example, Germany and Russia made the “Nazi-Soviet agreement” which was met by Germany and Russia promising peace to each other, Parker argues that Chamberlain “misled the Soviet government” which forced them to make an alliance with Hitler at the expense of the Soviet Union”. Parker explains that Chamb>GET ANSWER