Post WWl, Russia was still not industrialized, suffering economically and politically and in no doubt in need of a leader after Lenin’s death. “His successor, Joseph Stalin, a ruthless dictator, seized power and turned Russia into a totalitarian state where the government controls all aspects of private and public life.” Stalin showed these traits by using methods of enforcement, state control of individuals and state control of society. The journey of Stalin begins now.
The author says that perhaps many citizens may be drawn to Communist ideology if the social injustices become more prevalent, and urges the readers to look into the problems of Communist civilizations. This article is an example of how many felt during the Red Scare and Cold War in regards to communism. It shows that people felt a collapse
When Stalin died in 1953, Nikita Khrushchev came into power. He brought about huge changes such as the de-Stalinization of the Soviet Union, the progress of the early Soviet space program, and ‘several relatively liberal reforms in areas of domestic policy’. However, as to quote the internet, ‘Hoping eventually to rely on missiles for national defense, Khrushchev ordered major cuts in conventional forces. Despite the cuts, Khrushchev 's rule saw the most tense years of the Cold War, culminating in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Some of Khrushchev 's policies were seen as erratic, particularly by his emerging rivals within the Party, who quietly rose in strength and deposed him in October 1964’.
The Soviet Union was a brutal communist dictatorship that ruled its people through fear and brutality; keeping them impoverished, underfed, poorly housed, and indoctrinated. This government was potentially the cruelest in modern history, and proves communism is not acceptable. Ever present factors of Soviet life included the military in every parade, corruption in every government level, an extremely powerful mafia, the overwhelming fear of deportation to Siberia, and a surprisingly strong sense of security that their country
It has been twenty-five years since the Soviet Union collapsed. Some people claim that the fall of the USSR is the best thing that could ever happen and some people think that it was a fatal disaster, but they all have to accept the fact that USSR is now only a part of our past, not as distant past to be forgotten because we still face the consequences of the Soviet Union disintegration such as instability, unemployment, and neglecting of intellectuals. The first consequence of the USSR catastrophe is really paradoxical. According to the article ‘Back in the USSR ' by Gedeon Lichfield, the results of a survey that was made by the US polling company Pew Research Center show that 55% of Russian population agree with the statement that it
It is evident that the beliefs, or ideology, held by the Soviet Union contributed greatly to the disaster. An ideology is a belief or set of ideas about the world that people accept as natural. Many of the beliefs held by this government not only undermined the importance of transferring important information between organizations, but also discredited the importance of safety regulations and devalued the safety of the people. Government officials instead valued the appearance of being a strong, legitimate government. The Soviet nuclear energy sector viewed minor accidents as acceptable.
In the aftermath of Joseph Stalin’s death in March of 1953, the Soviet Union had to consider how it would move forward as a nation without the leadership of such a strong individual who was not only trusted by the founder of the nation, Vladimir Lenin, but had led them to victory during World War 2. Stalin was an incredibly capable, but controlling, leader in the Soviet Union and while the masses revered him as a living God the Secret Speech made by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev at the 20th Congress took aim at the “cult of personality” that Stalin created and demanded some type of social, political and economic reform. Author Elena Zubkova in her article “The Rivalry with Malenkov” argues that Soviet society wanted to reform directly after
Introduction On May 24, 1945, Joseph Stalin gave a speech at a reception in the Kremlin in honor of the Commanders of the Red Army troops to celebrate victory over Germany in World War II. This speech in the Kremlin elicited great pride amongst Russians and set the tone for the Soviet-centered policies of the post-war years that fueled the new propaganda machine. It was through the policies of Andrei Zhdanov (collectively known as the Zhdanov Doctrine) that the Soviet people elicited a new-found sense of Soviet pride and nationalism that compelled them from the day of Stalin’s victory speech in the Kremlin up until Stalin’s death in 1953.
The leaders of the USSR continued to oppress the cultures that did not agree with Communist ideals, forced the citizens of the country to abide by strict rules and laws, eliminated political opponents and enemies of the state alike by sending them to gulags, and brainwashed the people with excessive amounts of propaganda. When Gorbachev made the wrong decision to allow freedom of speech, the people were allowed to lash out the anger that they had been keeping at the Gorbachev administration. Such people began using their privileges by mocking and insulting the government. They spread the word around about how horrible the government was and spread rumors of creating a rebellion. Nationalists of former countries who joined the USSR demanded that the government should free the country that they were currently in.
The period of late 1920’s and early 1930’s saw fundamental changes to the Soviet Union. During this period Stalin consolidated his authority and was allowed to rule with impunity, introducing his “revolution from above” on the Soviet people. In 1931 as he kicked off the 5 Year Plans Stalin made a seminal speech to the First Conference of Soviet Industrial Managers.
That was the message that Gorbachev was trying to let everyone know. He was a communist, but he was also a reformist. He wanted to implement rapid changes in economic and political systems so that the people of the Soviet Union could start shifting their worldviews (pre-Stalin) and start adopting his belief systems of peace, equality, liberty (Zwick 215-218). Consequently, Gorbachev’s worldviews did not fully get through to the population of the Soviet Union which made him lose control of his people (Wood, 12-13,
Immediately after World War II, the USSR put high emphasis on determining its allies and enemies in the colonial world (at that time, most of the Third World was under European domination). The beginning of the Cold War (1947-1991), a state of neither war nor peace between the U.S. and the Soviet Union (Robert Service, 2015), the USSR attempted to export the Marxist-Leninist model in the Third World. In this context, the U.S. started shoring up governments which appeared willing to resist the spread of communism. At the same time, the U.S. and its Western allies began establishing development institutions to further “fight” the expansion of communism. The Soviet Union used the United Nations (UN) and its agencies as a means to gain allies,
That’s why this extended essay is going to explore to what extent did Gorbachev and his policy cause the dissolution of USSR and fall of communism in Europe? However, this essay is going to take not only Gorbachev’s ruling into consideration, but also the recent period before him and main domestic and foreign causes that influenced breakdown of USSR and communism.
During the year 1989 a major and unexpected event shocked the foundation of the world: Communism fell in Eastern Europe. This was a result of a series of revolutions closely linked which occurred in several countries in the Soviet bloc. Particularly with the case of Stephen Kotkin, revolution is defined as a ‘forcible overthrow of a government or social order, in favour of a new system’. Whereas Timothy Garton Ash discusses the particular events in Eastern Europe in terms of ‘refolution’, that is the combination of revolution and reform, rather than what he calls the ‘very loose’ term of revolution. Deciding which term is more appropriate for which event can indicate whether the people or the individual governments can be attributed to causing the fall of Communism.
The Soviet Union had been through torpidity under the progression of the old Communist Leaders who ruled with fear in addition with inertia.
