More handpicked essays just for you.
Stalin industrial policy impact on working class
Stalin's transformation of the Soviet Union
Essays on stalins economic policies
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Was Stalinism Inevitable?
Introduction
"Let's replace Long Live Leninism with Long Live Stalinism!” This declaration by a communist leader and staunch Stalin supporter Lazar Kaganovich perhaps best summarizes the popularity and personality cult of Joseph Stalin which overtook and in some cases, replaced the precepts of Marxism-Leninism. Although many see Stalinism as the natural heir and iteration of Leninism, others see it as a gross deviation from the principles of Marxism-Leninism, deeming Stalinism as all those steps and policies that lead to the formation of a society based on the vision, principles and ideals of Joseph Stalin, while maintaining a threadbare association or even using as a cover the adherence to Marxist-Leninist’s philosophy.
Stalinist policies include, but are not limited to:
- Rapid Industrialization: ‘Socialism in one country’- the doctrine of political construction that internalized all efforts of the Soviet Union instead of reaching outwards to faltering revolutions the world over;
- Collectivization of agriculture - which transferred ownership of land and agriculture from wealthy individuals and families to the community and to the people at large, dominating Soviet agricultural landscape up till 1991; a rigid, secretive and tyrannical party system that placed importance and emphasis on the Communist party as the foremost representative of the people, the Soviet nation and the ideals of Marxism-Leninism.
Another defining feature of Stalinism was the liberal and unchecked usage of state violence against so-called enemies of the state, saboteurs, foreign spies and any and all individuals that were deemed, almost always arbitrarily, as being harmful to the state. Class violence was another unique feature...
... middle of paper ...
...ch Stalin.
Was this inevitable? Perhaps. Perhaps not. There are a massive number of factors at play in the answer to this simple question. Should Trotsky have shown more ambition? Should Lenin have looked more closely, given lesser freedom to Stalin? Should the Central Party leadership have put aside their petty concerns of political considerations for the nobler purpose of Russia’s well-being? The calculations, permutations and combinations are manifold but what is certain is that what Stalinism was and who Stalin became and what became of the Soviet Union under his command was a complete and utter betrayal of Lenin and his commandments. It was a betrayal on the same par as anyone has seen throughout history and mythology and one that has altered history and left the very real and achievable utopia of a workers state to be consigned to the dusty pages of ‘what if?’
Tucker, Robert C. "Stalinism as Revolution from Above". Stalinism. Edited by Robert C. Tucker. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1999.
Joseph Stalin said, “Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don 't let our people have guns. Why should we let them have ideas?”. Stalin was a dictator of the USSR from 1929 to 1953. Under his dictatorship, the Soviet Union began to transform from a poor economy to an industrial and military based one. While still a teen, Stalin secretly read Karl Marx 's book the “Communist Manifesto”, and became more interested in his teachings. When Stalin gained power, he ruled his nations using terror and fear, eliminating those who did not comply with his governance.
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].
“The Sources of Soviet Conduct” Foreign Affairs, 1947, explains the difficulty of summarizing Soviet ideology. For more than 50 years, the Soviet concept held the Russian nations hypnotized, discontented, unhappy, and despondent confined to a very limited Czarist political order. Hence, the rebel support of a bloody Revolution, as a means to “social betterment” (Kennan, 567). Bolshevism was conceptualized as “ideological and moral, not geopolitical or strategic”. Hoover declares that… “five or six great social philosophies were struggling for ascendancy” (Leffler, The Specter of Communism, 20).
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.
Originally platformed by Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin took control of the communist party in 1924 when Lenin died of a stroke. Communist ideals were heavily in opposition to classical liberal values; Whereas Liberalism stressed the importance of the individual, Communism sought to better the greater good of society by stripping many of the individual rights and freedoms of citizens. Communism revoked the class structure of society and created a universal equality for all. This equality came with a price however. Any who opposed the communist rule were assassinated in order to keep order within society. Joseph Stalin took this matter to the extreme during an event known as the Great Purge. The Great Purge, also known as The Great Terror, began in 1936 and concluded in 1938. During these two years, millions of people were murdered and sent to labour camps in Siberia for opposing the Communist party and the ultimate dictator, Stalin himself. In some cases, even those who did not oppose the regime were killed. Sergey Kirov was a very popular member of the communist party and Stalin saw this as a possible threat to his ultimate power. As a result, Stalin order Kirov to be executed. Stalin furthered his violation of individual rights by introducing the NKVD who worked closely with the russian secret police force. One of the primary goals of the secret police was to search out dissidents who were not entirely faithful to the communist regime. This violation of privacy caused histeria en mass in the Soviet Union and millions were killed as a result. The Soviet union resisted liberalism to such an extreme that it resulted in the deaths of millions of people, leading to some of the darkest days in russian
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.
Isaac Murrin Mr. J. Pharion Freshman English 20 February 2013 The Similarities and Differences between Lenin and Stalin Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin were similar in what they claimed to be, but in actuality they were very different people. Although Stalin claimed that he followed Leninism, the philosophy that Lenin developed from Marxism, he often distorted it to follow what he wanted to do. While Lenin wanted to make a unified society without classes, with production in the hands of the people, while Stalin wanted to make Russia into a modern industrial powerhouse by using the government to control production. Lenin accomplished his goals through violence, because he thought achieving the Communist revolution was worth using violence, with a ‘The ends justify the means’ mentality. Stalin also used violence to accomplish his goals, however Stalin used much more violence than was often necessary to accomplish his goals.
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 in 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's. It could be argued that this increasing power for the single leader drawn from his party was due to the need for fast, decisive and unquestioned leadership of the type needed in battle. After all Russia was portrayed by the Soviet propaganda machine as being at war with its own industrial backwardness as workers were urged to industrial `fronts'. If the period of the 1930s is considered, it was a time of crisis. The building tension due to the rise of Nazi Germany making European foreign politics a risky place to navigate, the economic onslaught at home in Russia and the economic depression in the rest of the world making the times harsh. This change then could be argued as being beneficial to the USSR as only a single individual can provide the strong leadership needed, amongst a large group of individuals disputes would hinder the decision making process. However, the idea of the...
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.
...ns of anti-Bolsheviks and according to Service, 500,000 sent to the Gulags through 1917-21. Pipes highlights the significance of the Red Terror as ‘a prophylactic measure designed to nip in the bud any thoughts of resistance to the dictatorship.’ Lenin also used class warfare to terrorise the middle classes and hostile social groups. This played well with the workers and soldiers and made it difficult to criticise the new government. As a result, Lenin’sintroduction 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.
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.
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.
This essay will concentrate on the comparison and analysis of two communist figures: Mao Zedong, leader of the Communist Party in China, and Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union. The main focus of this paper will be to explore each figure’s world view in depth and then compare and contrast by showing their differences and similarities. Joseph Stalin was a realist dictator of the early 20th century in Russia. Before he rose to power and became the leader of the 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, 1999).
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. Lenin’s reforms were necessary to carry out a socialist revolution in Russia, and the contributions he made drastically changed the course of history. It can be assumed that, the Soviet Union would not have been as powerful if it was not for Lenin’s initial advocacy of violence and tight organization.