StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

The Soviet Leaders as Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
This paper 'The Soviet Leaders as Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman' tells that It is important to remember the historical context in which Stalin made this speech. Stalin’s various economic initiatives and plans sought to provide jobs and industrial growth and to provide a viable alternative to Western capitalism…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER93.2% of users find it useful
The Soviet Leaders as Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "The Soviet Leaders as Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman"

Stalin) In his speech to the All-Union Conference of Socialist Industry, the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin made the clear point that the overall goal of the his 1930-31 initiatives was “a total increase of industrial output by 45 per cent” (Tasks 1998). It is important to remember the historical context in which Stalin made this speech. The whole of the industrialized West was mired in a grave economic depression. Thus Stalin’s various economic initiatives and plans sought, in the main, to provide jobs and industrial growth and to provide a viable alternative to Western capitalism. Through the use of propaganda, the Soviet Communist Party used all means at its disposal to demonize capitalist countries. It sought to convince the peoples of Russia and Eastern Europe that the plans and policies of the Soviet government were working in their interests. This propaganda centered on what Stalin called “the class enemy”. There were, lurking everywhere, enemies of the Soviet proletariat who were doing all they could to arrest the Soviet initiatives and the proletarian revolution. The main reasons Stalin cited first involved the need for growth. He spoke of the “disease of capitalism” as being something the USSR should avoid. His growth initiatives were necessary because the Soviet people deserved “a government desirous and capable of utilizing these immense natural resources for the benefit of the people…and that this government should enjoy the support of the vast masses of workers and peasants” (Task 1998). To fulfill the “objective possibilities” (the potential industrial growth estimates if planning and labor worked with prefect efficiency) the USSR needed “a party sufficiently solid and united to direct the efforts of all the best members of the working class.” The other main reason involved “our obligations to the world proletariat…The working class of the U.S.S.R. is part of the world working class. We achieved victory not solely through the efforts of the working class of the U.S.S.R., but also thanks to support of the working class of the world.” (Task 1998). Stalin wanted to internationalize the efforts and policies of the Soviet government for propaganda purposes. In his eyes, the results of the First Five Year Plan were a stunning success (no surprise there). Most significant for him and for history was his claim that the USSR had been converted from an agrarian nation into an industrial country…” (Results 1998). To some extent this was true, Stalin did greatly increase industrial output, without which the Soviets could never have fought Hitler in the way that they did. Stalin also mentioned several figures and percentages as being symbolic of the plan’s success. He claimed that industrial output had grown 3 times in volume compared to pre-1917 levels. As well, he claimed that the country had been “modernized.” This was a long-standing Soviet obsession: to emulate and supersede the capitalist West. Krushchev) In his now famous 1956 speech denouncing Stalin and his policies, Krushchev listed several of Stalin’s crimes against the Soviet Union. Mainly he mentioned the many repressions and “putsch” which resulted in the murder and death of thousands of Party members and supposed “enemies of the state.” “Whoever opposed this concept or tried to prove his viewpoint, and the correctness of his position was doomed to removal from the leading collective and to subsequent moral and physical annihilation…prominent party leaders and rank-and-file party workers, honest and dedicated to the cause of communism, fell victim to Stalin’s despotism” (Secret 2009). Krushchev constantly contrasted Stalin’s “excesses” with Lenin’s more righteous policies and decisions. One major crime which Krushchev laid at Stalin’s feet was his development and dissemination of a “cult of personality.” Under Stalin’s rule, photos and slogans praising him were ubiquitously spread and posted all over the Soviet Union. “In practice Stalin ignored the norms of party life and trampled on the Leninist principle of collective party leadership” (Secret 2009). Stalin had diverged from proper Communist principles. The reasons that Krushchev offered to explain Stalin’s actions were that they resulted from his own personality flaws. He quoted Lenin as saying that Stalin was “excessively rude, that he does not have a proper attitude toward his comrades, that he is capricious and abuses his power…” Basically Stalin was a power-hungry fiend who was completely obsessed with himself. Krushchev said that Stalin’s wasting of time on repressions against the innocent weakened the country in the later fight against Hitler. “Had our industry been mobilized properly and in time to supply the army with the necessary material, our wartime losses would have been decidedly smaller” (Secret 2009). Krushchev very shrewdly sought to link himself and his claims back to Lenin. Stalin was portrayed as having deviated from the “true socialist path.” Lenin had set the example and Stalin had corrupted it. He had to make sure that he did not criticize socialism but still was able to denounce Stalin. By speaking of true socialism as set forth by Lenin, he avoided any potential “heresies.” Merriman) The reasons that European Communism began to unravel in the 1980’s are several in number, but there are some main ones. According to Merriman the decline and end of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries related to a mixture of poor leadership and industrial decline and decrepitude. In the early 1980’s under the leadership of Party Secretaries Andropov and Chernenko, the Soviet government had sought to maintain a sense of policy freeze. Starting in the 1970’s the government had been able to improve the quality of life of its people by engaging in international trade and by borrowing from Western countries. Under Brezhnev, structural problems related to the Soviet economy were ignored and allowed to fester. When in the 1980’s Andropov and Chernenko were running things a lack of will and a desire to maintain the status quo prevented any meaningful economic reforms. As well, the ability of a utopian ideology to convince and move the masses had lost its appeal. The people in the Eastern bloc no longer trusted anything the government said. As such, many in power feared making any reforms because this would signal that traditional socialist ideology was being questioned and consequently the political breakdown could be accelerated. In addition, the world economy, of which the Soviet Union in the 1980’s was very much a part, had changed. The ability of a state like the USSR to maintain control over such a vast territory and plurality of people was no longer viable. The technological advances being made in the West could not possibly be matched by the USSR. The actual end came with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. As people openly challenged Communist governments throughout the Warsaw Pact countries and the former Soviet Union, these regimes quickly began to collapse. Gorbachev chose not to use violence and repression to put down the uprisings. Boris Yeltsin began to assert Russian independence and one by one all of the former communist governments gave way. Today many post-communist countries have had to adjust to living in a market economy. Many people, especially initially, had become accustomed to having the government provide them with work, housing, healthcare, and pensions. The idea of having to provide for oneself was a relatively novel one. All these countries had to create modern currencies and stock markets and literally fire scores of government workers. As well, people had to learn to live in consumer society. State-owned enterprises had to be sold and private entrepreneurship encouraged. New American Century Project The Project for a the New American Century’s proposals sought to exploit the favorable position the United States held at the end of the 1990’s towards the goal of spreading American values and democracy. The stated principles were to increase defense spending so as to modernize the armed forces, to strengthen our ties to democratic nations and criticize non-democratic ones, promote economic and political freedom across the world, and use America’s unique power and role to strengthen global security and prosperity (New 1997). As optimistic and laudable as these claims may seem, the legitimacy and foundations of their logic are suspect in my opinion. The idea that acting on these principles can provide for a better world in the post-Cold War world is questionable given historical precedent and recent examples. The United States many times throughout the twentieth century claimed to be working in the interests of the world when in reality it was working in its own interests (and not just the general interests of the country but rather in those of its elite). President Wilson took us to war in 1917 so that American could be “the arsenal of democracy.” He claimed that America’s part in that war was purely humanitarian. The fact that he himself had invaded several countries in Latin America so as to further the interests of American corporations received little mention. The influence of the British was something Wilson never mentioned. The extent to which democracy was protected in the decades after World War One speaks for itself. When Johnson and Kennedy took us into Vietnam they spoke of the need to stop the advance of Communism, the fact that defense companies were making money hand over fist hardly detracted from their overall vision. As such the principles laid out by the Project for the New American Century are largely just a rehashing of past American imperialism and greed. The fact that they call for growing the military is but a form of government-speak for giving billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to defense companies. “Acting on these principles” usually means something quite different in real life than when it first appears on paper. How have we strengthened ties to democratic regimes when it is publicly acknowledged that the US actively supports dictatorships provided they oppose terrorism (an example was Tajikistan during the Bush years). The extent to which the neo-Conservative project has created a better world for all is laughable. Opinion of the United States around the world is at an all time low. “The better world” that was created involved an unprovoked invasion of Iraq based upon what turned out to be completely false claims and a protracted war in Afghanistan with no end in sight. Only through a supreme act of myopia and/or cognitive dissonance can someone still believe that these “principles” will create a better world. Works Cited “The New American Century Statement of Principles.” July 3, 1997. Project for the New American Century. December 12, 2009 http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm “The Results of the First Five-Year Plan.” Editor David J. Romagnolo. February 1998. Foreign Languages Press. December 12, 2009 http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/RFFYP33.html “The Secret Speech – On the Cult of Personality.” Editor Paul Halsall. July 1998. Internet Modern History Sourcebook. December 12, 2009 http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1956khrushchev-secret1.html “The Tasks of Economic Executives.” Editor David J. Romagnolo. February 1998. Foreign Languages Press. December 12, 2009 http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/TEE31.html Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(The Soviet Leaders as Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words, n.d.)
The Soviet Leaders as Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words. https://studentshare.org/history/1731047-stalin-khrushchev-and-their-legacies
(The Soviet Leaders As Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words)
The Soviet Leaders As Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words. https://studentshare.org/history/1731047-stalin-khrushchev-and-their-legacies.
“The Soviet Leaders As Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words”. https://studentshare.org/history/1731047-stalin-khrushchev-and-their-legacies.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF The Soviet Leaders as Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev, Merman

The USSR's Voracity for Power

12 Pages (3000 words) Essay

The Europe History since 1900: Compare Stalin and Hitler

This paper examines five primary sources on Adolf Hitler and joseph stalin in the context of their roles in European and world history, and in the context of critical analyses of the sources.... It is to be noted too, that during this time, the Soviet Union under joseph stalin largely viewed itself as the passive victim of what amounted to a bold and “predatory” move by Germany, and in contravention of the non-aggression treaty that it signed with the Soviet Union two years prior (Molotov 1941)....
5 Pages (1250 words) Assignment

Reforms under Khrushchev and Gorbachev

He had a close link to Soviet leader joseph stalin, and after Stalin's death in 1953 Khrushchev surfaced as the new leader.... After the war, the soviet political system seemed blameless: its organizations had administered the war attempt and financial development recommenced at high levels by evaluation with the capitalist West.... Concerning foreign policy, Khrushchev promoted 'peaceful coexistence,' and reduction of strain involving the United States and the soviet Union....
10 Pages (2500 words) Coursework

The Magical Chorus - a History of Russian Culture from Tolstoy to Solzhenitsyn by Solomon Volkov

Life for Russian artists during the soviet era was quite turbulent.... Such American musicians as Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong were very popular among the soviet people.... Charles Bohlen, the American ambassador to the soviet Union, had noticed the popularity of the voice of America jazz programs in Moscow and at his suggestion in1955 the station began a special project, Music USA, devoted to jazz.... talin's successor, Nikita khrushchev, sought both to cleanse the USSR of Stalin's memory and to forge a new alliance with its artists....
9 Pages (2250 words) Book Report/Review

Leadership and Management Skills of the Great Personalities of the Twentieth Century

This research is being carried out to evaluate and present the leadership and management skills of the great personalities of the twentieth century such as Adolf Hitler, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Joseph Vissarrionovich stalin and Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill.... This research will begin with the statement that Adolf Hitler, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Joseph Vissarrionovich stalin and Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill were some of the prominent politicians of the twentieth century....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

The Cause and the Significance of the Berlin Blockade to the Cold War

The Berlin blockade occurred when the Russians blocked the western allies (France, Britain and the United States of America) from accessing their sectors of Berlin which lay in the soviet occupied East Germany.... This was preceded by a partial blockade in April 1948 before the.... ...
8 Pages (2000 words) Research Paper

The Role of Individuals in the Making of Modern Russia in the Years 1854 to 1964

While these wars differed with regards to their political influence, most of them resulted in changes to the Russian development agenda linked, as well, During this period, three individuals had especially significant roles in the development of modern Russia; the Romanov Tsars Alexander II and Nicholas II, Vladimir Lenin and joseph stalin, and Nikita Khrushchev.... While Lenin and khrushchev did not lead their countries to war, they were, nevertheless, involved in military action that had significant effects on the development of modern Russia....
9 Pages (2250 words) Essay

China's Accession to the Western Hemisphere

Once in office, Mao signed a friendship treaty with the USSR and remained loyal to the soviet Union until after Stalin's death, accepting Soviet doctrine and numerous Soviet advisers (Harding 1992, p.... It made possible the limited nuclear test-ban treaty approved by the foreign ministers of the United States, the soviet Union, and Great Britain in August 1963.... Upset at khrushchev's de-Stalinization, which he branded revisionism and a capitulation to capitalism, Mao became convinced that China needed to build its unique version of communism....
18 Pages (4500 words) Research Paper
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us