Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Thesis for the american revolution and french revolution
History essay on revolution
History essay on revolution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
I have chosen to write my response paper on our course’s monograph Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin, by Timothy D. Snyder published by Basic Books in 2010. This text is considered revisionist history and has been very well received, even earning the 2013 Hannah Arendt Prize for Political Thought. Snyder’s was considerably unconstrained in his research. He has a reading knowledge of eleven European languages allowing him utilize a wide range of primary and secondary sources. These widespread sources allowed him compile a book containing many groundbreaking perspectives and conclusions.
The main argument (thesis) of the text is that the “bloodlands” was the region where the regimes of Stalin and Hitler, regardless of their contradictory objectives and ideologies, interacted to intensify the tragedy and bloodshed that was worse than any seen in western history. The bloodlands are defined as the region that includes modern-day Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States, Poland and a portion of western Russia. The storyline examined in the text was over events that occurred in the bloodlands from the early 1930s to the 1950s, and the actions of the Nazi and Stalinist regimes that resulted in the murder of over fourteen million people. These
Fisher 2 events were: the political famine directed at Soviet Ukraine (1932-1933), Stalin’s Great Terror of 1937-1938, the combined German and Soviet effort to destroy the Polish educated class (1939-1941), Siege of Leningrad, Holocaust in German occupied Poland, Baltic States and Soviet Union, additionally the Soviets and Germans provoked one another to commit greater crimes. I believe Snyder wrote this text in order to view these events in an interconnected, broader perspective. He states,...
... middle of paper ...
...of one without mentioning the other.) I believe our instructor chose this specific text because it not only contains the main themes of the course but also discusses them with an original assessment. The text also attempts to teach the reader about the society and cultural that produced it. Bloodlands interweaves personal anecdotes and accounts and from the region moving beyond merely recording what happened and offering human
Fisher 4 dimensions. The Soviet and Nazi regimes “turned people into numbers” the author attempts to avoid the reader from doing the same (408). Snyder not only describes how the Soviet and Nazi regimes operated similarly, and details how they (before imperialism caused them to turn on each other in 1941) assisted each other. Both the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany attempted to achieve their vision of utopia implemented through mass killings.
The account of Jedwabne is unique in the fact that it focuses on one mass murder of roughly 1,600 Jewish residents, which occurred in July 1941. The murder occurs during the violent German campaign of anti-Semitism in Poland. The main occurrence seen across Germany and Poland of the anti-Semitism campaign was the killing and justified harassment of Jewish residents. Without a doubt the event in Jedwabne was triggered by Nazi influence. What is interesting is how Gross represents these influences. He shows that the killings of Jedwabne were planned, organized, and enthusiastically conducted by local authorities and citizens of the non-Jewish community. Gross also points out that it is possible that Germans did not participate in this killing and that it is even possib...
Under a backdrop of systematic fear and terror, the Stalinist juggernaut flourished. Stalin’s purges, otherwise known as the “Great Terror”, grew from his obsession and desire for sole dictatorship, marking a period of extreme persecution and oppression in the Soviet Union during the late 1930s. “The purges did not merely remove potential enemies. They also raised up a new ruling elite which Stalin had reason to think he would find more dependable.” (Historian David Christian, 1994). While Stalin purged virtually all his potential enemies, he not only profited from removing his long-term opponents, but in doing so, also caused fear in future ones. This created a party that had virtually no opposition, a new ruling elite that would be unstoppable, and in turn negatively impacted a range of sections such as the Communist Party, the people of Russia and the progress in the Soviet community, as well as the military in late 1930 Soviet society.
The main purpose of the book was to emphasize how far fear of Hitler’s power, motivation to create a powerful Germany, and loyalty to the cause took Germany during the Third Reich. During the Third Reich, Germany was able to successfully conquer all of Eastern Europe and many parts of Western Europe, mainly by incentive. Because of the peoples’ desires and aspirations to succeed, civilians and soldiers alike were equally willing to sacrifice luxuries and accept harsh realities for the fate of their country. Without that driving force, the Germans would have given up on Hitler and Nazism, believing their plan of a powerful Germany...
With the dawn of civilization soon thereafter followed the creation of authoritarian and totalitarian establishments. The history of man is inundated with instances of leaders rising to power over certain groups of people and through various means gaining formidable control to be used for good, evil, or an ambiguous mixture of both. However, it is an undeniable fact that once unchecked power is acquired, tyranny often ensues, and thus a dictatorial regime is born. Over the centuries, governmental establishments have risen and fallen, but as history and civilization progress, so does the potential for a larger and more powerful domination. The development of differing and contrasting theologies and structural philosophies leads not only to conflict, but perhaps more prominently to unification under one rule with a common belief, especially when that unifying belief provides a promising sense of belonging and structure to a weak society. This is what led to the rise of two of the most domineering totalitarian governments in history: Stalin’s Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and Hitler’s Nazi Germany, or the Third Reich.
Following the beginning of the Second World War, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union would start what would become two of the worst genocides in world history. These totalitarian governments would “welcome” people all across Europe into a new domain. A domain in which they would learn, in the utmost tragic manner, the astonishing capabilities that mankind possesses. Nazis and Soviets gradually acquired the ability to wipe millions of people from the face of the Earth. Throughout the war they would continue to kill millions of people, from both their home country and Europe. This was an effort to rid the Earth of people seen as unfit to live in their ideal society. These atrocities often went unacknowledged and forgotten by the rest of the world, leaving little hope for those who suffered. Yet optimism was not completely dead in the hearts of the few and the strong. Reading Man is Wolf to Man: Surviving the Gulag by Janusz Bardach and Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi help one capture this vivid sense of resistance toward the brutality of the German concentration and Soviet work camps. Both Bardach and Levi provide a commendable account of their long nightmarish experience including the impact it had on their lives and the lives of others. The willingness to survive was what drove these two men to achieve their goals and prevent their oppressors from achieving theirs. Even after surviving the camps, their mission continued on in hopes of spreading their story and preventing any future occurrence of such tragic events. “To have endurance to survive what left millions dead and millions more shattered in spirit is heroic enough. To gather the strength from that experience for a life devoted to caring for oth...
The events which have become to be known as The Holocaust have caused much debate and dispute among historians. Central to this varied dispute is the intentions and motives of the perpetrators, with a wide range of theories as to why such horrific events took place. The publication of Jonah Goldhagen’s controversial but bestselling book “Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust” in many ways saw the reigniting of the debate and a flurry of scholarly and public interest. Central to Goldhagen’s disputed argument is the presentation of the perpetrators of the Holocaust as ordinary Germans who largely, willingly took part in the atrocities because of deeply held and violently strong anti-Semitic beliefs. This in many ways challenged earlier works like Christopher Browning’s “Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland” which arguably gives a more complex explanation for the motives of the perpetrators placing the emphasis on circumstance and pressure to conform. These differing opinions on why the perpetrators did what they did during the Holocaust have led to them being presented in very different ways by each historian. To contrast this I have chosen to focus on the portrayal of one event both books focus on in detail; the mass shooting of around 1,500 Jews that took place in Jozefow, Poland on July 13th 1942 (Browning:2001:225). This example clearly highlights the way each historian presents the perpetrators in different ways through; the use of language, imagery, stylistic devices and quotations, as a way of backing up their own argument. To do this I will focus on how various aspects of the massacre are portrayed and the way in which this affects the presentation of the per...
After the World War I, Germany, Italy and Japan were majorly affected by and resented the inequality of the Treaty of Versailles. These “have-not” countries were under the rule of repressive dictatorship, which in turn sought to redress the issues caused by the World War I. In Germany, Adolf Hitler, a one-time Germany’s chancellor who rose to power during the 1920s and early 1930s at a time of when political, social, and economic upheavals rose continuously. He came to light as a prominent leader of the Nazi Party, as he seized his massive power by spreading Red Scare, or the fear of Communism (Sanford, p. 126). Under the reign of Hitler, Red Scare was the major issue used to obtain power and supporters, as Hitler’s self-interest in his own rule and expanding German territories trumped the fundamental human rights.
It is no mystery that Stalin’s brutal totalitarian regime costed the lives of millions of Soviet citizens. It is estimated that between 1930 and 1953, over one million Soviet citizens were executed, six million were deported to special settlements, 16 to 17 million were imprisoned in forced labor, and three to five million starved to death (131-132). However, the question is, do these crimes amount to genocide, the crime of crimes? Many scholars would not label Stalin’s crimes as genocide since they do not fit nicely into the definition of ‘genocide’ as stated in the Genocide Convention of 1948, which defines genocide as, “Acts committed with the intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.” (15-24). However, in his book “Stain’s Genocides”, Norman Naimark, argues that there is overwhelming evidence that Stalin’s crimes amount to genocide. To prove his case, Naimark brings up the controversy
It is no mystery that the lives of the prisoners of Nazi concentration camps were an ultimate struggle. Hitler’s main goal was to create a racial state, one consisting purely of the ‘superior’ Aryan race. The Germans under Hitler’s control successfully eradicated a vast number of the Jewish population, by outright killing them, and by dehumanizing them. Auschwitz is the home of death of the mind, body, and soul, and the epitome of struggle, where only the strong survive.
In order to conclude the extent to which the Great Terror strengthened or weakened the USSR, the question is essentially whether totalitarianism strengthened or weakened the Soviet Union? Perhaps under the circumstances of the 1930s in the approach to war a dictatorship may have benefited the country in some way through strong leadership, the unifying effect of reintroducing Russian nationalism and increased party obedience. The effects of the purges on the political structure and community of the USSR can be described (as Peter Kenez asserts) as an overall change from a party led dictatorship to the dictatorship of a single individual; Stalin. Overall power was centred on Stalin, under whom an increasingly bureaucratic hierarchy of party officials worked. During the purges Stalin's personal power can be seen to increase at the cost of the party.
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.
Yahil, Leni. The Holocaust: The Fate of European Jewry. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Norton, James. The Holocaust: Jews, Germany, and the National Socialists. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc., 2009. Print.
MODERN HISTORY – RESEARCH ESSAY “To what extent was Nazi Germany a Totalitarian state in the period from 1934 to 1939?” The extent to which Nazi Germany was a totalitarian state can be classed as a substantial amount. With Hitler as Fuhrer and his ministers in control of most aspects of German social, political, legal, economical, and cultural life during the years 1934 to 1939, they mastered complete control and dictation upon Germany. In modern history, there have been some governments, which have successfully, and others unsuccessfully carried out a totalitarian state. A totalitarian state is one in which a single ideology is existent and addresses all aspects of life and outlines means to attain the final goal, government is run by a single mass party through which the people are mobilized to muster energy and support.