Some say that Stalinism can be said to be a continuation and development for Leninism. Stalin pulled his regime away from the that could be a continuation from Leninism would be the idea of government control over industry and agriculture. This could also relate to the idea of taking control over the working class and the workers. One idea that stayed the same would be the economic policy. Although Stalin did stray a little far from the New Economic Policy, he did use the idea temporary. Another feature common to both Stalin and Lenin was their attempts to eliminate any democratic or representative forms of government. Lenin and Stalin’s suppressions weren’t just to the non-communists. Both worked to eliminate any possible dissention within …show more content…
The next two leaders were Nikita Khrushchev and after that it was Leonid Brezhnev. Nikita Khrushchev was the next leader of the Soviet Union; he had taken over Stalin’s old job of being General Secretary. Khrushchev had many experiences under Stalin; he was involved in the Five Year Plans, the purges and WWII. Khrushchev policy involved negative aspects which come with resenting the rich and grievances. His positives would be that everyone is equal and life would be overall better. Khrushchev believed that Stalin deformed the idea of Communism. So to put it in a nice way Khrushchev hated Stalin. Khrushchev gave a ‘Secret Speech’, with that he spoke about all the horrible things Stalin had done for the USSR. The main things that Khrushchev said was that Stalin unjustly persecuted on communists, Stalin miscalculated with Hitler and WWII and he allowed and encouraged cult leadership. Khrushchev’s goal was to undermine Stalin supporters, the thought if you move away from bad things, good things will eventually happen. He then started something outsiders called ‘de-stalinization.’ This completely stopped praise of Stalin. This did lead to a rift with a few leaders, one leader was Mao and he is from China. At this time China didn’t do well with
A comparison of these two are Both leaders saw that changes were essential, they knew that without reforms, the Soviet Union would grow weaker and weaker. Khrushchev’s and Gorbachev’s reforms were wide and touched almost all important aspects of the government. One important aspect is how Khrushchev and Gorbachev saw the past and future. When Khrushchev came to power he had a big problem how to replace Stalin and how to rule the country after him. Stalin ruled through a cult of personality and many people thought that he was irreplaceable. At “the Twentieth Congress of the Khrushchev attacks Stalinism and the Cult of Personality in the secret speech, he denounced Stalin and the terror of his regime, everything Stalin did or said was incorrect,
Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt led the nation through the second world war. Roosevelt built a powerful wartime coalition with Britain and the Soviet Union, and led the U.S to victory against Nazi Germany. He was elected for presidency four times, serving from 1933 until his death in 1945. His wartime efforts prepared the path for Harry Truman, to win the war against Japan four months after his death.
In order to establish whether Lenin did, indeed lay the foundation for Stalinism, two questions need to be answered; what were Lenin’s plans for the future of Russia and what exactly gave rise to Stalinism? Official Soviet historians of the time at which Stalin was in power would have argued that each one answers the other. Similarly, Western historians saw Lenin as an important figure in the establishment of Stalin’s socialist state. This can be partly attributed to the prevailing current of pro-Stalin anti-Hitler sentiments amongst westerners until the outbreak of the cold war.
Joseph Stalin became leader of the USSR after Lenin’s death in 1924. Lenin had a government of abstemious communist government. When Stalin came into government he moved to a radical communist society. He moved away from the somewhat capitalist/communist economy of Lenin time to “modernize” the USSR. He wanted to industrialize and modernize USSR. He had overworked his workers, his people were dying, and most of them in slave labor camps. In fact by doing this Stalin had hindered the USSR and put them even farther back in time.
for this similarity is that war, especially long and expensive war, causes fatigue and disdain within a nation. Without a strong leader, the people grow desperate and crave a strong leader. Lenin and Napoleon were also similar in the way they desired to be depicted in the eyes of their people. Both leaders wanted to be seen as strong and powerful leaders, who commanded authority and would bring their respective nations back.
Stalin’s hunger for power and paranoia impacted the Soviet society severely, having devastating effects on the Communist Party, leaving it weak and shattering the framework of the party, the people of Russia, by stunting the growth of technology and progress through the purges of many educated civilians, as well as affecting The Red Army, a powerful military depleted of it’s force. The impact of the purges, ‘show trials’ and the Terror on Soviet society were rigorously negative. By purging all his challengers and opponents, Stalin created a blanket of fear over the whole society, and therefore, was able to stay in power, creating an empire that he could find more dependable.
Joseph Stalin was a realist dictator of the early 20th century in Russia. Before he rose to power and became the leader of Soviet Union, he joined the Bolsheviks and was part of many illegal activities that got him convicted and he was sent to Siberia (Wood, 5, 10). In the late 1920s, Stalin was determined to take over the Soviet Union (Wiener & Arnold 199). The main aspects of his worldview was “socialism
Khrushchev rose steadily up the party ladder, always combining his talents as an administrator with his technical training. After assignments in the Ukraine, he became head of the Moscow regional party committee, and in 1934 he became a member of the Central Committee of the Soviet Communist party. In these positions he directed the construction of the Moscow subway. Although increasingly influential, Khrushchev was never an intimate associate of Joseph Stalin; he concentrated on technical rather than political accomplishment. After World War II he was brought back to Moscow, where he became ¡¥one of stalin¡¦s top advisers¡¦. When Stalin died in 1953, Khrushchev used his wit to thrust all his opponents for leadership, including Malenkov. He became both Party Secretary and controlled the government through his associate Marshal Bulganin, who he named Premier. He ruled from 1956 to 1964.
There have been many dictators through out history that have shaped the way we look at them now. Sometimes it’s the way that dictators came to power that people judge them on. Sometimes it’s how long they stayed in power, but it’s not just how long they stayed in power. It’s what they did to stay in power. These two men are some of the most infamous dictators for those reasons alone. These men are Joseph Stalin and Fidel Castro, and they played a huge part in shaping the way we look at dictators today.
Stalin continued even once he was successful in accomplishing those goals, as he did not stop hurting people, but if anything it gave him more power to hurt people even more. But, at the end of the day, although Lenin ruled for only a very short time, he did raise the standard of living, though there maintained a large amount of hardship. Stalin, however, transformed the USSR from a peasantry to an industrialized nation in less than a decade, he did it on the backs of his millions of victims, who died because of his harsh policies and many purges. Lenin made a series of policies throughout the beginning of the Revolution and through his short time in public office that came to be collectively known as ‘Leninism’. There were many things that influenced Leninism, such as Karl Marx.
In the beginning Josef Stalin was a worshiper of his beloved Vladimir Lenin. He followed his every move and did as he said to help establish and lead the Bolshevik party. Much of the early part of his political career was lost due to his exile to Siberia for most of World War I. It wasn’t until 1928, when he assumed complete control of the country were he made most of his success. After Lenin’s death in January 1924, Stalin promoted his own cult followings along with the cult followings of the deceased leader. He took over the majority of the Socialists now, and immediately began to change agriculture and industry. He believed that the Soviet Union was one hundred years behind the West and had to catch up as quickly as possible. First though he had to seal up complete alliance to himself and his cause.
Notably, many philosophers and scholars believe that the past is a powerful stimulus that dictates a given country’s future. On the contrary, for some of them, the statement, “Do not allow yourself to be overawed by traditional beliefs and institutions. Slavish regard for the past prevents society from achieving a happier life,” seems very true. However, the past may not necessarily affect a society adversely. Indeed, philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, Karl Marx, and Edmund Burke have conflicted thoughts on the impact on traditions on a community’s future since Kant and Marx seemed to support the statement mentioned above while Burke was more conservative with this idea and believed that the
A leader is defined as a guiding or directing head. Stalin was the leader of the party that was in charge of the Soviet Union. He created a totalitarian regime which brought great suffering to the Russian people. The individual Russian played two distinct roles under Stalin. One role would be that of a person who under Stalin’s system was no different than the person who is standing next to them. Everyone was treated equal in all facets. The other role the individual Russian played was that of a victim. We are able to see by many different accounts that an individual had different roles to play and under Stalin, each role came with a price that sometimes lead to death. The role of the individual Russian played a huge role in Stalin’s aim at creating a stronghold on a nation that ended up imprisoning and killing millions of its own people
But Stalin’s dictatorship increased in strength and by 1938, the purges had made Russian’s so fearful, they were willing to accept the totalitarian ruler instead of the democratic system which had originally been hoped for in the February 1917 revolution. Stalin had also used fear as a motivator for workers and managed to industrialise. Overall the most similarities occur between Alexander III and Stalin due to their repressive actions but although all the Tsars and Stalin depended on central control, it cannot be said that there were more similarities because of the power and support for Stalin’s when his reign ended compared to the weak Tsarist system which Russians felt was not worth saving.
Marxism and Leninism According to most historians, “history is told by the victors”, which would explain why most people equate communism with Vladimir Lenin. He was the backbone of Russia’s communist revolution, and the first leader of history’s largest communist government. It is not known, or discussed by most, that Lenin made many reforms to the original ideals possessed by many communists during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. He revised Karl Marx and Friedrich Engles’ theories to fit the so-called ‘backwardness’ of the Russian Empire.