Identified within this study is the argument that whilst many of Lenin’s theories and practices were continued under Stalin, many were in fact developed and extended to new levels, possibly reflecting different motives: what Pipes refers to as Stalin’s ‘personality of excesses’. Although for many years, numerous historians including both members of the Western school of thought (such as Pipes), along with the official Soviet historians of the time believed that Stalin was the natural heir of Lenin, opinions have changed with time. As more evidence came out of Stalin’s mass atrocities, the Soviet historians soon began to see Stalin as the betrayer of the revolution as Trotsky had always maintained, …show more content…
According to this view, had Lenin lived, these policies would probably have been reversed as political and economic stability was restored, and certainly would not have given rise to the mass extermination of millions of peasants and party members, which prevailed under Stalin in the 1930s. In scrutinising the actions of Stalin, I have examined especially how they differed from those of Lenin, and in what ways the motives for similar actions changed. One aspect of continuity is reflected in the control and influence that both Lenin and Stalin had over their parties. In 1921, Lenin effectively destroyed democracy in the party through his ban of factionalism. Although this was used to end the problem of splits (during the crisis of the same year), many see it as a key factor in allowing Stalin to rise to power. Stalin often accused people of factionalism (e.g. Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev) as a response to any challenges to his authority. It also created a situation that allowed the party leadership to do what it wanted and dismiss any opposition. Pipes argues that as a result of this, the Bolsheviks were carefully coerced into always following Lenin’s will, and that his policy of ‘democratic centralism’ was merely a façade like many of the other
Lenin was able to consolidate Bolshevik rule in Russia by combining popular policies and repression: To what extent do you agree with this statement.
Question: How far did Stalin achieve and maintain what Kruchev described as “the accumulation of immense and limitless power”, in the USSR between 1924 and 1945?
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.
Communism is a political and social act where everything was controlled by the Government and the citizens having no say. Life in Russia has forever been different than that of Canada. Although Russia claims to be a democracy, its citizens do not fully know the idea of freedom. Joseph Stalin had a plan to make Russia the super power of the world but ultimately failed because communism never works. Stalin released new ideas that he thought would help improve the economy but never actually did. From the time that Stalin came into power in 1924, up until his death in 1953 he transformed Russia’s previously more week society into an active military and industrial superpower striking fear and terror into its citizens. Stalin did play a huge role in defeating the Axis power in WWII but is seen as a communist who was a ruthless ruler responsible for the deaths of over 20 million people. Although some people believe that Joseph Stalin’s plan for communism was good, in reality many horrors affected his people, the economy, and the future of Russia.
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. As relations changed between Russia and the rest of the world, so did the main historical schools of thought.
The Bolshevik party was based on Marxist ideals, ideals which sought to rid society of class conflict and create an egalitarian society. After the fall of the provisional government, the Bolsheviks were now able to implement an economic policy of their own, introducing a form of communism called ‘War Communism’. It was a form of strict communism that, amongst many things, took money out of circulation and banned private enterprise. It should, therefore, seem surprising that the Bolshevik government got rid of this policy, a policy which espoused many Marxist principles of destroying interclass conflict through the abolition of private enterprise, and replacing it with the NEP, a policy which at first glance, may resemble something much more capitalist orientated than would one expect of a party based on communist ideals. The NEP was a policy that reintroduced “a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control” . This may have therefore have been a step back from achieving a Marxist utopia in the Russian State but it can be argued that the continuance of war communism would have ultimately led to the utter economic collapse of the Russian state and the NEP prevented this from occurring.
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.
Vladimir Lenin Vladimir Lenin was the Bolshevik leader. He was a clever thinker and a practical man; he knew how to take advantage of events. When Lenin arrived in Russia, he issued a document called the April theses, promising ‘peace, bread, land and freedom’. He called for an end to the ‘Capitalist’ war, and demanded that power should be given to the soviets.
Compare and contrast the ideologies and the political and economic practice of Lenin and Stalin.
The Impact of Stalin on Russia and the Russian People Joseph Stalin was born to a poor family in the province of Georgia in 1879. Stalin's real surname was Djugasvili; he adopted the name 'Stalin' whilst in prison as he felt the translation 'Man of Steel' would help his image. Stalin joined the Bolshevik party as a young man and soon became an active member organizing bank raids to gain money for party funds; this led to Stalin's imprisonment a number of times. Stalin first met Lenin in December 1905 in Finland and was quite surprised to see him as an ordinary man unlike the person he had imagined. In 1918 Stalin was made Commissar for Nationalities of the Bolshevik party, then in 1922 he became
once this was a very silly idea as they would not be able to pull it
Joseph Stalin was the leader of the Soviet Union from 1922-1953, when he died. He was responsible for one of the most notable and devastating genocides, the Great Purge. His vicious reign took the lives of around 20-60 million people by his rigid and cruel treatment. Through his exploitation of the lower class and his manipulative abuse of power, Stalin created one of the worst examples of leadership in history. It takes an interesting character to be able to execute the cruelties displayed in his regime and the traits that Stalin developed into his cult of personality were likely acquired as a child and adolescent.
Joseph Stalin’s three decade long dictatorship rule that ended in 1953, left a lasting, yet damaging imprint on the Soviet Union in political, economic and social terms. “Under his inspiration Russia has modernised her society and educated her masses…Stalin found Russia working with a wooden plough and left her equipped with nuclear power” (Jamieson, 1971). Although his policies of collectivisation and industrialisation placed the nation as a leading superpower on the global stage and significantly ahead of its economic position during the Romanov rule, this was not without huge sacrifices. Devastating living and working standards for the proletariat, widespread famine, the Purges, and labour camps had crippling impacts on Russia’s social
only had the firm support of 15 of 25 members on the 15th of October.
The command system, which is also described as Marxism, socialism, or communism, is both a political and economic philosophy. In a communist economy, the government owns most of the firms, subsequently controlling production and allocation of resources. One of the most well-known and well-documented cases of a communist government took place in the Soviet Union, beginning in 1917 and eventually falling in 1992. Idealistically, communism eliminates social classism and provides equal work for all in a particular society. The government appoints a central planning board to “determine production goals for each enterprise and to specify the amount of resources to be allocated to each enterprise so that it can reach its production goals.”