Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparing Lenin and Stalin
Stalin's leadership
Effects of Stalin's policy on the soviet people
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Comparing Lenin and Stalin
STALIN’S CULT OF PERSONALITY
Joseph Stalin’s regime was fabricated upon, fear, propaganda, and exclusively governing the empire's economy. Stalin needed to do this in order to maintain control over the Soviet Society, and direct the USSR in the manner he desired. Stalin’s cult of personality manufactured dogmas that had an adverse consequence on his empire. Several of these dogmas were enforced to ameliorate the overall standards of the Soviet society, instead, these dogmas ensued chaos and resulted in the loss of millions of lives. Stalin's personality cult was an addition of an already existing cult of Lenin and the members of the Politburo, aimed at maintaining the loyalty of the people.[1] Stalin’s utilization of his “Cult of Personality”
…show more content…
Stalin used propaganda in order to ameliorate his portrayal to the Soviet Society by depicting himself as an almighty leader, whom everyone loved and admired. Stalin’s popularity among the soviet people permeated every level of their culture. He became the chosen theme of authors, artists, poets, filmmakers, and musicians. Several impressive statues of Stalin were erected at public places throughout the USSR. In addition, numerous Soviet villages, towns, and cities were renamed after him. The several forms of extensive broadcasting used by Stalin’s personality cult included newspapers, radio, literature, cinemas, and, posters. Stalin became a preferred topic of the Soviet Press, they wanted to depict Stalin as a leader who was fervently linked with the Soviet Society. Several newspapers frequently published letters written by farmers and industrial workers, adulating Stalin for bringing hope and happiness in their lives. [2]After the end of the World War 2, Stalin's Cult of Personality was reaching its apex, as newspapers giving Stalin credit for independently winning the war, emphasizing his portrayal as an all-powerful leader. Another form of broadcasting was achieved through the radio. Since radio was common household item among the lower class of the Soviet Society the Cult of Personality used this extensively, by uttering his name constantly in the presence of the Soviet people. An additional …show more content…
A prime instance of Stalin’s cult of personality rewriting history can be seen in the propaganda to portray a campaign that presented the Soviet Society how close Stalin’s relationship was with their deceased leader Vladimir Lenin. However, in reality, Lenin was not fond of Stalin; in a testament written by Lenin in January 1922, he states that “Stalin is too rude and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealing among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a Secretary-General. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing another man in his stead”. Although Lenin’s true successor was Leon Trotsky, Stalin still managed to maintain his position and become the leader of the Soviet Union. Once Stalin rose to power, he and his allies, Grigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev, forced Trotsky to resign from his position as Minister of War.[6] Later these men came to realize the kind of leader Stalin leader was and they allied with Trotsky and tried to remove him from his position. However, before this could be accomplished Stalin had both men expelled from the Central Committee. Stalin also expelled Trotsky from the Politburo after leading the failed struggle of the Left Opposition against the ideologies of Stalin
As relations changed between Russia and the rest of the world, so did the main historical schools of thought. Following Stalins death, hostilities between the capitalist powers and the USSR, along with an increased awareness of the atrocities that were previously hidden and ignored, led to a split in the opinions of Soviet and Western Liberal historians. In Russia, he was seen, as Trotsky had always maintained, as a betrayer of the revolution, therefore as much distance as possible was placed between himself and Lenin in the schoolbooks of the 50s and early 60s in the USSR. These historians point to Stalin’s killing of fellow communists as a marked difference between himself and his predecessor. Trotsky himself remarked that ‘The present purge draws between Bolshevism and Stalinism… a whole river of blood’[1].
death in 1953. But how is it that Stalin emerged as the new leader of
In conclusion, many soviets citizens appeared to believe that Stalin’s positive contributions to the U.S.S.R. far outweigh his monstrous acts. These crimes have been down played by many of Stalin’s successors as they stress his achievements as collectivizer, industrializer, and war leader. Among those citizens who harbor feelings of nostalgia, Stalin’s strength, authority , and achievement contrast sharply with the pain and suffering of post-revolutionary Russia.
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
Joseph Stalin killed many people in order to provoke a government of fascism.With his obsession in changing the USSR from a backward, peasant-centered, agrarian nation to an industrial superpower, Stalin developed a totalitarian government that ruled over individual lives, striking fear in the converted and threatening death or hard labor camps for the unconverted. The totalitarian rule under Joseph
When most people hear the name Joseph Stalin, they usually associate the name with a man who was part of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and was responsible for the deaths of millions of people. He was willingly to do anything to improve the power of the Soviet Union’s economy and military, even if it meant executing tens of millions of innocent people (Frankforter, A. Daniel., and W. M. Spellman 655). In chapter three of Sheila Fitzpatrick’s book, Everyday Stalinism, she argues that since citizens believed the propaganda of “a radiant future” (67), they were able to be manipulated by the Party in the transformation of the Soviet Union. This allowed the Soviet government to expand its power, which ultimately was very disastrous for the people.
A power struggle for control of the Bolshevik party began after Vladimir Lenin's death in 1924. Among the several contenders, two of the most important names in this struggle were Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. Ultimately, Stalin was able to secure power and vote out Trotsky. In the following essay I will discuss the reasons why Stalin rather than Trotsky emerged as the leader of the USSR in 1929.
Similarly, Stalin used propaganda and extreme nationalism to brainwash the peoples of Russia. He channeled their beliefs into a passion for Soviet ideals and a love of Stalin. In both cases, love for anything but the Party is the biggest threat to the regime. The stability of the Party and Stalin’s regime directly depended upon loyalty to the government above all else. By drawing upon the close relationships between the two Orwellian societies, we can examine just how dangerous love is to the Party.
Son of a poverty-stricken shoemaker, raised in a backward province, Joseph Stalin had only a minimum of education. However, he had a burning faith in the destiny of social revolution and an iron determination to play a prominent role in it. His rise to power was bloody and bold, yet under his leadership, in an unexplainable twenty-nine years, Russia because a highly industrialized nation. Stalin was a despotic ruler who more than any other individual molded the features that characterized the Soviet regime and shaped the direction of Europe after World War II ended in 1945. From a young revolutionist to an absolute master of Soviet Russia, Joseph Stalin cast his shadow over the entire globe through his provocative affair in Domestic and Foreign policy.
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.
the Party and bureaucracy was able to extend his personal authority. and the Party’s control over the people. The cult of personality was a bizarre semi religious institution that emerged following Stalin’s assumption of power. Stalin helped further the cult of personality by institutionalising art and culture. Artists and workers were either forced to join the Union of Soviet artists, or otherwise operate illegally.
During Stalin’s regime, the individual Russian was the center of his grand plan for better or worse. Stalin wanted all of his people to be treated the same. In the factory the top producer and the worst producer made the same pay. He wanted everyone to be treated as equals. His goal to bring the Soviet Union into the industrial age put tremendous pressure on his people. Through violence and oppression Stalin tried to maintain an absurd vision that he saw for the Soviet Union. Even as individuals were looked at as being equals, they also were viewed as equals in other ways. There was no one who could be exempt when the system wanted someone imprisoned, killed, or vanished. From the poorest of the poor, to the riches of the rich, everyone was at the mercy of the regime. Millions of individuals had fake trumped up charges brought upon them, either by the government or by others who had called them o...
Joseph Stalin's Rule Stalin was an evil dictator whose rule did nothing to improve Russia." Joseph Stalin was a dictator of Russia, his plan was to revolutionise. the country. During his reign he achieved his goal but at the cost of millions of lives. He imprisoned millions of his citizens, army and members of the Communist Party.
The dichotomy between Joseph Stalin and Leon Trotsky is pivotal in understanding the power hierarchy in the Bolshevik party and their successful attempt at revolution in 1917. When considering the various schools of historiography examined, the views on the two political figures differs greatly depending on the sources school and therefore biases. However, generally Stalin is presented far more negatively in most historiographies being depicted suspicious and threatening, rapidly gaining power through deceptions and generally antagonizing the political climate of Soviet Russia, only being seen as truly pure in pro-Stalinist propaganda. Contrastingly, Trotsky is presented as cunning but never conniving, a prestigious and unparalleled military