Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Totalitarian governments stalin
The impact of the cold war on capitalism and communism
Totalitarian governments stalin
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Totalitarian governments stalin
Saddam Hussein: A Sexy Tyrant The legacy of Josef Stalin is horrendous. “BY his word he could kill them, have them tortured, have them rescued again, have them rewarded. Life and death depended on his whim,” recalls German psychoanalyst Erich Fromm of Stalin’s thirty year reign (Goode, “The World; Stalin to Saddam”). Stalinist terror came to an end, however, once Mikhail S. Gorbachev took office. Forming alliances with Western countries while abolishing several oppressive policies, Gorbachev attempted to reintroduce the once inimical, Communist Russia into the global community as a newly reformed ally. He dubbed Stalin’s actions as “enormous and unforgivable,” and the outlook for world peace in the latter half of the twentieth century seemed …show more content…
There was a great storm brewing five thousand kilometers south of Russia, however, which intended to destroy such hope; taking form in a man by the name of Saddam Hussein. While Gorbachev and Reagan hashed out a new world order free from Stalinist tyranny, Saddam Hussein intended to do everything in his power to carry the despotic torch well into the turn of a new century. Saddam Hussein, despite being a member of Iraq’s Ba’ath Party and never having officially adopted Communism, was a Marxist-Lennist in practice by every sense of the ideology. Saddam, like Stalin, was an iron-fisted monster who ruled by torture and oppression. Only a few tyrants exist in history that are responsible for the amount of destruction in such a short amount of time as Saddam Hussein. His senselessness and belligerence account for over five million lives in just under 10 years. These senseless acts, namely the Dujail Massacre, Al-Anfal Campaign, Halbja chemical attack, two wars, and systematic oppression of Iraqi citizens Saddam proves …show more content…
The reason for this being twofold: first, Iraq’s sworn enemy Iran is almost exclusively Shia, and second, the Sunni-Shia divide is an age old Islamic struggle that is often used for political leverage throughout the Middle East. Needless to say, Saddam wanted to create a purely Sunni, Arab Iraq, and in 1982, just three years after becoming president, his unpopularity amongst Iraq’s Shia population became evident as his motorcade was assaulted by several gunmen in the city of Dujail. It is alleged that “at least 15 people were said to have been executed immediately and 143 others were executed after show trials. Some versions put the final death toll as high as 400, including women, children and babies” (Carroll, “Saddam trial to open”). Furthermore, “around 1,500 residents were arrested and many spent years in prison,” settlements were destroyed, as well as vegetation (Carroll, “Saddam trial to open”). Saddam Hussein essentially made an entire city of Shia residents pay for the transgressions of a dozen men. Enraged by the attempt made on his life, Saddam began to realize the threat that some of these ‘infidels’ posed on his regime, and as times evolved so did his oppressive nature and sheer brutality in the latter half of the 1980s. Nothing exemplifies Saddam’s senselessness and austerity as accurately as his Arabization agenda, which persecuted Iraqi Kurds more than any other ethnic group
Tucker, Robert C. "Stalinism as Revolution from Above". Stalinism. Edited by Robert C. Tucker. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1999.
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.
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.
However, evidence that is presented may indicate otherwise, as Joseph Stalin provides adequate counter claims for discrediting the “simplicity” of “yes”. Within this controversial topic, two authors provide their sides of the story to whom is to blame and/or responsible for the “Cold War.” Authors Arnold A. Offner and John Lewis Gaddis duck it out in this controversial situation as each individual leads the readers to believe a certain aspect by divulging certain persuading information. However, although both sides have given historical data as substance for their claim, it is nothing more than a single sided personal perception of that particular piece of information; thus, leaving much room for interpretations by the reader/s. Finding the truth to either claim is the obligation of the reader and outside research would accommodate the authors potential inadequacies and personal fallacies.... ...
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.
Throughout history, tyranny was seen demonstrated on many occasions, when rulers wanted to have an absolute power over all the aspects of the country they are ruling. One of the famous tyrants in the history of the middle east countries or may be the history of the world is Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq for more than 23 years, he tortured, arrested and killed many people during the time of his reign. In the article of Tales of Tyrants, Mark Bowden is trying to show that Saddam Hussein was a brutal and cruel leader who used violence and ferocity in order to control the Iraqis and plant his fear in them to hide his weakness and insecurity. Bowden uses the repetition of the words “dangerous, intimidate, fear and brutal” to prove that
In September 1980, a very destructive war with Iran was started by Saddam Hussein. This was a result of an invasion in Iran. This invasion spurred an eight year war. Saddam used c...
One of the worst nations to suffer from Stalin’s great purges in the Soviet Union was not the Russians. Fascist sought to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity which individuals are bound together by ancestry, culture, and blood which are all super personal connections. However, even though Stalin did enforce Russia of the Soviet Union the main enemies of his were the political opponents and their followers. His most ferocious acts of terror “The Great Purges” took place between 1934 and 1939.
Odd Arne Westad, Director of the Cold War Studies Centre at the London School of Economics and Political Science, explains how the Cold War “shaped the world we live in today — its politics, economics, and military affairs“ (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1). Furthermore, Westad continues, “ the globalization of the Cold War during the last century created foundations” for most of the historic conflicts we see today. The Cold War, asserts Westad, centers on how the Third World policies of the two twentieth-century superpowers — the United States and the Soviet Union — escalates to antipathy and conflict that in the end helped oust one world power while challenging the other. This supplies a universal understanding on the Cold War (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1). After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union opposed each other over the expansion of their power.
The cold war was failed by the Soviet Union for many reasons, including the sudden collapse of communism (Baylis & Smith, 2001.) This sudden collapse of communism was brought on ultimately by internal factors. The soviet unions president Gorbachev’s reforms: glasnost (openness) and perestroika (political reconstructering) ultimately caused the collapse of the Soviet Empire. Gorbachev’s basics for glasnost were the promotion of principles of freedom to criticize; the loosening of controls on media and publishing; and the freedom of worship. His essentials of perestroika were, a new legislature; creation of an executive presidency; ending of the ‘leading role’ of the communist party; allowing state enterprises to sell part of their product on the open market; lastly, allowing foreign companies to own Soviet enterprises (Baylis & Smith, 2001.) Gorbachev believed his reforms would benefit his country, but the Soviet Union was ultimately held together by the soviet tradition he was trying to change. The Soviet Union was none the less held together by “…powerful central institutions, pressure for ideological conformity, and the threat of force.
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.
In this paper, I intend to analyze Iraq war of 2003 from Realist and Marxist/ Critical perspectives. I intend to draw a conclusion as to which theoretical framework, in my opinion, is more suitable and provides for a rational understanding of the Iraq War. While drawing comparative analysis of two competing approaches, I do not intend to dismiss one theory in entirety in favour of another. However, I do intend to weigh on a golden balance, lacunas of both theories in order to conclude as to which theory in the end provides or intends to provide a watertight analysis of the Iraq war.
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...
The Great Terror, an outbreak of organised bloodshed that infected the Communist Party and Soviet society in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), took place in the years 1934 to 1940. The Terror was created by the hegemonic figure, Joseph Stalin, one of the most powerful and lethal dictators in history. His paranoia and yearning to be a complete autocrat was enforced by the People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs (NKVD), the communist police. Stalin’s ambition saw his determination to eliminate rivals such as followers of Leon Trotsky, a political enemy. The overall concept and practices of the Terror impacted on the communist party, government officials and the peasants. The NKVD, Stalin’s instrument for carrying out the Terror, the show trials and the purges, particularly affected the intelligentsia.
Pre-invasion Iraq reflected the views and policies of its leader, Saddam Hussein, who made his first political appearance as a supporter of the Ba’ath Party. He was jailed in 1967 for this, and after his escape quickly rose to power within the faction. (Saddam Hussein Biography, 2008) Saddam became known for his political talent and progressiveness, and soon became a popular politician. After working on extensive unification and expansion efforts for the Ba’athists, the man rose to vice chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council. Faced with a tremendous amount of religious, racial, social and economic divisions, Saddam launched a campaign of total control to bring about stability.