'Germany experienced a period of political calm, international security, and social and cultural progress in the mid-1920s'. How far do you agree with the judgement?

'Germany did experience a period of political calm, international security, and social and cultural progress, but only in a relative sense. The years prior and after this period of calm were far more hostile, therefore the political calm experienced was only in comparison to the turbulent years before and after. Following the war and the crisis of 1923, both periods of highly unpredictable and adverse international and domestic circumstances, Germany began to rebuild with the republic. In this apparent period of calm, there was nevertheless strong opposition from certain sections of society, but this was mostly dealt with by the government. Despite this 'deceptive stability', some short-term progress was made. Democratic parties were still winning the majority of the vote, showing that more people than not were in support of the Weimar Republic. The economy was still steadily growing, as well, although this was a highly risky strategy strongly dependent on powerful external factors that were uncontrollable at the time. Nevertheless, the economy grew. Another sign of progress was the cultural progress made. Berlin in particular rivalled Paris as the culture capital of Europe, and was famous for its lively nightlife and occasionally risqué clubs. It was building a cultured identity, something that it had struggled to achieve beforehand. Despite this, all these smaller, insignificant details masked over the cracks that appeared all over German society. This can be summed up in four categories: an unstable economy, a divided society, mostly through class, regional, and religious differences; political division, foreign affairs. Consequently, during the mid-1920s Germany did experience a period of relative calm, although there were still prominent weaknesses and divisions in society that would prove to influence Germany massively in the late-1920s and 1930s.'  ///              Explanation - In A-Level you are passed the stage of making a completely balanced argument and ultimately not making a conclusion and sitting on the fence. I think what is important is, after reading up on the topic (in addition to learning it in class), you form a clear argument backed up by evidence and several points, rather than playing it safe and avoiding an ultimate judgment. Although this would only be an introduction to an essay, it mentions relevant points to support the ultimate argument that 'during the mid-1920s Germany did experience a period of relative calm, although there were still prominent weaknesses and divisions in society that would prove to influence Germany massively in the late-1920s and 1930s.' Although historiography is not essential in A-Level by any means, it certainly helps state an argument, although it should not be forced - each piece of historiography should be explained or put into context either before or after the quote or piece of information. Irrespective of whether historiography is used or not, the argument should be tightly-made, with each sentence adding to the original argument. There is no need to include every single piece of information you know on the topic, so instead pick particularly valuable pieces of information and explain how it is relevant to the question and answer, rather than listing everything you know.