More handpicked essays just for you.
Totalitarian regimes in the Soviet Union
Nicholas ii and his downfall as leader
Totalitarian regimes in the Soviet Union
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Totalitarian regimes in the Soviet Union
Tsars and communists use of institutions to supress opposition were successful to an extent but Stalin’s use of the institutions proved effective because of his repressive policies, which made institutions carry out his rigid methods of stability which removed opposition. Polices like collectivisation, Five-Year Plans etc. not only supressed opposition to the extent that the masses felt powerless, but strengthened the economy with rapid industrialisation. Whereas, with Nicholas 2nd, his reforms made it easier for oppositional groups like the kadets to take over and with Stolypin, his reforms embarked upon repressive measures for social change, which focuses on some change, some continuity compared to Stalin’s regime. For example, there is some continuity with Alexander 3rd with previous dumas as the extensions in freedom of civil liberties in the October Manifesto and the limited Fundamental Law in 1906 established that Nicholas 2nd used to the duma silence the masses want of constitutional reform. The dissatisfaction made opposition inevitable like the peasant rebellion and Kadet...
death in 1953. But how is it that Stalin emerged as the new leader of
In fact the Soviet people never saw any of these rights. Constitutional rights could only be used to support the regime, not to criticize it. In conclusion, many Soviet citizens appear to believe that Stalin’s positive contributions to the U.S.S.R. far outweigh his monstrous acts. These crimes have been downplayed 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.
As Warren Bennis, a scholar on the subject of leadership, once said, “Leadership is the capacity to translate vision into reality.” This statement certainly holds true no matter what type of leader you look at. From cruel dictators such as Joseph Stalin, who fought and killed to stay in power, to peaceful leaders like Mohandas Gandhi, who used nonviolent tactics to emancipate India from the United Kingdom, to Jesus Christ, who started a religion and spread his message of love and forgiveness far across the globe, they all had a vision of how they wanted to change the world, for the better, or for the worse.
This played well with the workers and soldiers and made it difficult to criticise the new government. As a result, Lenin’s introduction of the Cheka (1917) and the emergence of the Red Terror (1918) ensured his rule was absolute not only within the party but across the Soviet Union. It is the accumulation of these factors that highlighted Lenin’s leadership and practicality following the seizing of power as well as changes to society with War Communism and the NEP and the use of terror which were all vital to consolidating Bolshevik power.
These developments are in the broad areas of governmental ideology, economic systems and the party’s dictatorship and authoritarian control. While addressing these main ideas, it is important to acknowledge that reformation and development does not necessarily imply a shift toward Western systems, rather is a move to a system that works effectively in the nation being studied, here immediately pre-dissolution USSR and Russia since that time. Marvin Kalb says that irrefutable proof of Russia’s irreformability is in the fact that in many ways, nothing in Russia has changed except for its name. This is supported by the fact that all of Gorbachev’s reforms were voted into law by all the nation’s political apparatus like the politburo, the Central Committee and the two congresses who voluntarily reduced their own powers and created a democratic avenue of appointment to these bodies.
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.
The Development of Totalitarianism Under Stalin By 1928, Stalin had become the undisputed successor to Lenin, and leader of the CPSU. Stalin’s power of appointment had filled the aisles of the Party Congress and Politburo with Stalinist supporters. Political discussion slowly faded away from the Party, and this led to the development of the totalitarian state of the USSR. Stalin, through.
Sources state that under Joseph Stalin’s rule there was a stable government; however, while Stalin may have had complete control over his people, the totalitarian tyrant’s rise to power created an unhealthy level of fear amongst Russian citizens. “[Stalin], more concerned with strengthening his own personal power than with furthering Communist revolution, destroyed Lenin's achievements [plunging] the Soviet Union into misery...from which it never recovered” (Lynch, para. 5). This loss of grounding under Stalin’s rule is a main contributor toward the terrorization of Russia, for it explains the extent Stalin reached in order to attain power. Watching people run in fear intensified Stalin’s will to kill for power causing his citizens’ angst to escalate. “I am not convinced that [Stalin] will manage to use this power with care” (WW II: Behind Closed Doors, para. 3). Lenin’s acknowledgment of Stalin’s inability to stabilize his use of power only foreshadows the hostile environment his citizens would endure. Stalin’s lack of connection with his subjects further enabled him to betray their trust and endanger their lives. “The four young pigs...raised their voices timidly, but they were promptly silenced by a tremendous growling from the dogs” (Orwell 77). The constant echo of the dogs played in the animals’ heads any time they heard the shee...
...In Soviet Union Stalin Pronounced his first five-year plans in ,1928, highlighting on the growth of future industrial. His approaches obtain popularity among the lower and poor working class. For Stalin’s prevail, also stressed on the idea of arrangement of agriculture. The arrangement of agriculture was to increase agriculture production and brought to the lower class and under classmen additional up-front political control. The leader of Politburo was Joseph and took pleasure with unrestrained power and control. In addition to the changes on the route of socialism, Joseph also gives reasons for banishing people who have more advantage over him and counter-revolutionary invaders.
Following the death of Josef Stalin in 1953, the harsh policies he implemented in not only the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, but also its many satellite nations began to break down. There was a movement to distance all of the socialist nations from Stalin?s sadistic rule. In the Peoples? Republic of Hungary, there was much disillusionment with this Stalinist absolutism (Felkay 50). This disillusionment with the Soviet ideal of socialism lead the people of the fledgeling socialist state of Hungary to rise up in revolt, but ill-preparedness and the strength of the Soviet Red Army put down the insurrection within several days.
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.
After the second World War, it became obvious that Joseph Stalin was a cruel, communist dictator as stories of his crimes began to be leaked, and he started to give the go ahead to some morally dubious movements. This tensions escalated towards this date in history, where the Soviet Union made one such movement in blockading East Berlin from the American side with the Berlin Wall. Described as the war that was almost the third World War, the Cold War was one that was fought with proxy wars, and to influence other countries towards communism, fighting against capitalism. Of course, Coca-Cola was the beverage that was closely associated with capitalism, therefore it was often outlawed in communist countries or the bottling factories were destroyed
At the start of WWII, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler signed a nonaggression pact that benefitted both countries. The pact meant that neither country could take military actions against the other, however, both dictators knew that they would break the pact when they signed it. The pact benefitted Stalin because it allowed him time to prepare his attack against Germany and turn the capitalist nations against each other. It also benefitted Hitler because he didn't have to worry about the Russians attacking Germany so he was able to focus on becoming a world power and attacking other countries. Before the pact was broken the USSR annexed many parts of Eastern Europe to expand his power. In June 1941, Germany broke the Nazi-Soviet pact when they