AppeasementThe task of explaining the reason for appeasement has been continually addressed by historians over the years. To date, no single cause has yet been identified. However, there is general consensus among historians that the appalling events of the First World War distilled a sense of fear and remorse in British society, and as a result Britain strove to prevent any future war, by whatever means necessary. In the aftermath of the First World War, a mutual agreement was established between the British government and society that never again would a catastrophe like the First World War occur. It was described as the "war to end all wars", reinforcing the idea that this was a catastrophic war event that should never be brought back into society. The British public became disillusioned with the use of force in international relations and consequently sought an effective collective security approach. In post-war society, anti-war books, films and poems all became increasingly popular, and several pacifist pressure groups were formed with the sole aim of achieving peaceful solutions to international problems. These groups were known as The Peace Pledge Union, The Peace Society, and the No More War Movement. The First World War essentially left Britain in a state of mourning, and as a result thousands of war monuments were erected and an annual day of mourning and remembrance, known as Remembrance Sunday, established. This was an attempt to pay homage to those heroes lost in war and to act as a subtle reminder of the devastation caused by war in an attempt to prevent any future conflict. As a result of the desolation a common consensus among public opinion was becoming evident, namely that there were no clear social benefits from the war and the country's evident economic and political decline showed no benefits in that sector either. So arms reduction and peace became vote winners in elections. Peacemaking can be defined as “a disposition to avoid conflict through judicious concession and negotiation.” Neville Chamberlain observed that the British public would neither desire nor accept another war. Therefore the British government tried to follow a policy of appeasement. However, not everyone shared the acceptance of the policy of appeasement. Looking in hindsight, many historians have condemned Chamberlai's actions... middle of paper... in the hinterland. There are conflicting opinions on this policy and on the question of why historians have continued to discuss appeasement over the past decades. Many believe that Chamberlain's policy of appeasement was fueled by a desire to do everything in his power to avoid war and by his belief that all the European powers shared the lady's sentiment. The catastrophic events of the First World War aroused in many a deep fear and hatred of war. Chamberlain is also believed to have followed the policy of appeasement as a means of buying time when he realized that British defenses were hopelessly inadequate, as British military strength had been significantly reduced due to the disarmament pledge. Even at the time of the Anschluss, Great Britain declared itself unprepared for war. Therefore, to conclude, whatever the reasons for the continued policy of appeasement, it can be said that appeasement with the sole aim of preventing war has not been successful, yet what it has been seen to do is prolong the inevitable. Many firmly believe that the continuations..