Compare And Contrast Lenin And Stalin

In conclusion to the fall of the Romanov dynasty, it is shown that Nicholas had the biggest impact of Russia becoming a communist country as he did not have a greater understanding on the way to run his country, he also didn’t take full responsibility for his people and the soldiers in WW1,

Tsar Nicholas II was a poor leader. It seems that he does not want to be the Tsar (71). When the Tsar received the telegram of the destruction of the Russian fleet a Tsushima, he simply placed into his pocket. He shows no interest in being a leader. A normal would have quickly reacted to that situation but the Tsar did not. During his reign (Nicholas II), Russia was in disaster (72). Forcing someone to do something, that person does not want to do will lead to disaster. He such a "leader" that Kaiser Wilhelm II patronizes him of "only fit to live in a country house and grow turnips." (9). The man has no strength, his is everything but strength. There are many holes in the government of Russia and in his leadership. The holes could have been filled up if he had picked up the slack and pushed himself to be leader. The resulting consequences of his poor leadership could have also been

Despite they’re being many similarities between Tsarism and Stalinism, it is too far to say Joseph Stalin acted in a way for him to be known as a “Red Tsar”. He implemented much of the same strategies as the Tsars before him but also drifted away and opposed much of Tsarism. His believed communism was the underlying factor in changing Russia, which wasn’t the case of a Tsarist regime. He portrayed himself as a personality cult who used the media to convey an ideolised heroic version of himself, very much like Tsar Nicholas II. He also implemented much of the same governmental structures of Tsarism, just under the badge of communism. Whilst Tsars had their body of Nobles and Okrana, Stalin had his Nomenklatura and NVKD. He controlled, manipulated

Both the Bolsheviks and the Nazis sought to create a new type of human being or a “new man.” Compare and contrast Nazi and Soviet visions of this new human type.

Joseph Stalin greatly influenced Russia in the years 1924 through 1932. His rise to this power can be explained by the Russian Revolutionary experience that allowed him to gain authority in Russia. Although historians often refer to Stalin as a ruthless, mindless dictator, he redirected the Russian Revolution to major economic development. Stalin’s character in Russia during the Revolution catalyzed the many events that took place during the time period. Because of Stalin’s ability to both appeal to the masses, and take advantage of events, like Lenin’s death, Stalin was able to rise to power. Essentially, the Russian Revolution fostered the development of Stalin’s dictatorship leading the country into a state of economic growth and influence. The Revolution fostered Stalin’s ability to maintain a central leadership, use violence to gain control, and regenerate a previously disconnected economy.

In the 1915s the Western countries had advanced technologies, a better economy and were managed successfully. However, Russia was trying something new, Communism. Lenin believed that Communism would make the country better. Shortly after his death, the man of steal, otherwise known as Stalin took control. He claimed to have the same ambitions; create a strong army, build up the industrial strength in a socialist society (Kreis, 2012). Despite their similar goals the actions they took to achieve them were completely different; Lenin is known to be on of the greatest leaders of Russia and Stalin the worst.

Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Lenin were both Bolsheviks looking to make a communist state in Russia. They both had ideals and methods that brought them to where they got to and what they had achieved. While Lenin was more of a democratic follower, and allowed inter-party discussions, he was also a great theorist of socialism. He was also a communist who focused on the temporary capitalist development of Russia. As for Stalin, he was an opportunist politician, and was also a communist mostly just for his personal benefits and gains. He had and followed socialist policies and didn’t have the best personality and attitude, he was quite rude and disgraceful. These two leaders were mainly shaped into who they were due to their past, by comparing them, it will show if their pasts affected their ideology and methods as how different it was, also seeing how with the similar aims, how with their different attitudes and personality, they were able to

    General Rafael Trujillo and Joseph Stalin were both harsh dictators. General Trujillo ruled the Dominican Republic. Stalin ruled the Soviet Union. Yet, other than being from different parts of the world, they had much in common while as many differences.

The means by which Nicholas II sought to rule as Tsar as well as his intrinsic characteristics played a significant role in the occurrence of Revolution in 1917. Nicholas was conservative by nature. His insufficient leadership tuition, brought about by his unexpected ascendance to power in 1894, forced his unwavering reliance on the systems established by his predecessors. Nicholas was a man of weak fortitude, his poor decisions and miscalculations throughout his reign owe much to his personality.

Tsar Nicholas II is thought to be personally responsible for the collapse of the Russian Monarchy. His nature wasn’t well suited for the role he held therefore he was an incompetent leader. Russia was undergoing many changes and was in early stages of industrialization. This was followed by an embarrassing string of defeats of which the Tsar was badly prepared. His unsuccessful involvement in the First World War added to the disappointment in the government’s incompetence and corruption. There were many opportunities for Russia to modernize but this would require political change, which the Tsar was unwilling to do. Nicholas had many opportunities throughout his reign to reform, but destroyed his last chance of survival.

Nicholas II was a poor leader, and he was aggressive to the people. For example, his armies were weak in World War I, and he had citizens who complained about work conditions killed. Also, inflation rose and many died of starvation during his time of leadership. Czar Nicholas was a bad leader and caused a lot of frustration throughout the country. Because of the bad reputation of Anastasia’s father, her whole family had a bad reputation.

The question of whether or not Stalinism was a logical continuation of Leninism is a difficult one. Stalinism did take significantly more drastic measures than Leninism did. There were differences in policy. But in spite of these, Stalinism still found its basis in Leninism. Even Trotsky, a friend of Lenin and a staunch opponent of Stalin, grudgingly admits that "Stalinism did issue from Bolshevism" (Trotsky). Stalin's policy of socialism in one country, his use of terror to eliminate opposition, and his suppression of democracy and the soviets were all characteristics of Lenin well before they were characteristic of Stalin. Although some of Stalin's policies were different from those of Lenin, what difference Stalinism did

Comparing Lenin and Stalin one finds that both were following a communist ideal but what is the communist ideal? The main principal is to share a country's wealth amongst its people. This is the theoretical side of the communist idea; the practical side requires a careful planning of the country's economy and also a system that makes sure that everybody is treated equally.

Compare and contrast the ideologies and the political and economic practice of Lenin and Stalin.

for is a difference in this two regimes . A pure race and Arians were