Date | May 2022 | Marks available | 15 | Reference code | 22M.2.BP.TZ1.17 |
Level | Both SL and HL | Paper | Paper 2 - first exams 2017 | Time zone | TZ1 |
Command term | Examine | Question number | 17 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Topic 9: Emergence and development of democratic states (1848–2000)
Examine the significance of leaders in the emergence of two democratic states, each chosen from a different region.
Markscheme
The question requires that candidates consider the interrelationship between the significance of leaders and the emergence of democratic states. The two states must be from different regions. The focus is likely to be on the significance of leaders in terms of ideology, strategy (violent or non-violent methods) and political acumen. More than one leader in each of the states may be studied. There may be examination of the significance of Cavour and Victor Emmanuel in extending democracy from Piedmont into an emerging independent Italy; in Ghana Nkrumah, the spearhead of the independence campaign, worked with the British to implement a plan for independence. The significance of Gandhi (who transformed the independence struggle into a mass movement) and Nehru (who established the principles underpinning the new Indian state and worked with the British leading up to independence) in India may be examined. Candidates may examine the ideological inspiration and martyrdom of Marti in Cuba. Candidates’ opinions or conclusions will be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.
Examiners report
The question required that candidates consider the interrelationship between the significance of leaders and the emergence of democratic states. Few responses were seen with the leadership of Nelson Mandela as a significant factor in the overthrow of apartheid in South Africa being the most popular example.