Stalin is the person I have studied the most in my pursuit of a history degree. I could write a book about what I personally believe. But I'll keep it short.
He was a brilliant tactician. He knew how to play the system and reach the top. Lenin wrote several letter to help stop Stalin from rising to the top. Stalin intercepted all these letters and hid them. He out-maneuvered Trotsky, the man who was supposed to succeed Lenin, very well.
His purges and cult of personality were terrible. He convinced the masses that he was continuing Lenin's plans. The purges in the 1930âs (The Great Terror) were horrible. After the assassination of a close advisor, Stalin ordered millions arrested and killed to stamp out any opposition. His worst act was the Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor). He deliberately took food from the Ukrainian regions to redistribute it among Russia. The food was rarely give back to the public and the attack was simply to punish the Kulaks (rich Ukrainian farmers) for opposing Communism. 7-8 million Ukrainians starved to death in 9 months. Thatâs months, not years. There was weather factors involved. Ukraine had the lowest rainfall in decades. Not all deaths can be attributed to Stalin, but he was responsible for many.
His industrialization plans for Russia were quite astounding. Russia had been far behind compared to the Western world. His plans to industrialize were massive, and also fulfilled. During the great depression, most of the world was poor and starving. Russia's economy throughout the 1930's increased by over 250%. They were the only country in the world not to be hit by the depression.
The industrialization was enough to put up a fight against Nazi Germany. Initially, the Soviets were devastated by the war. But after the bloody victory at Stalingrad, the Soviets were able to single-handedly fight back the Germans. 80% of all casualties in the European theater were on the Eastern Front. 27 million Soviets died in the war. But because of Stalin's mass production of technology, arms, mines, etc., they were able to win the war.
Right after WWII, and before the Cold War started, the Russians were scared to death of the Germans. Germany had devastated Russia twice in just over 30 years. Stalin called for a weak Germany so they could not attack the Russians again. It only made sense. The warmongering Germans had killed about 40 million Russians in two wars. Almost every country in the world feared Germany and wanted them to be weakened. The United States, on the other hand, called for a strong democratic Germany. This would make sure that they did not look to another dictator to lead them. It was very risky, and the Stalin refused to allow it. To weaken Germany, he had the Soviets take over the areas they controlled in hopes that a non-unified Germany would be took weak to cause a future war. He also made sure that the rest of Eastern Europe was allied with the Soviets to act as a buffer zone in case of an attack.
Iâm not trying to justify Stalinâs actions. But Iâm trying to create some historical empathy here. If you were the leader of the Soviet Union after WWII, you would probably be scared to death of the Germans as well. In your mind, the US is crazy to call for a unified, strong Germany. The only real way to counter this is to take over your half of Germany and keep the Germans from unifying. And again, most of Europe sided with Stalin on the German question. So this was not just Stalin trying to take over as much territory as possible. There was a mass fear of the Germans, and Stalin was simply trying to protect Russia from future attack.
Could there have been less brutality? Of course. Stalinâs reign in Eastern Europe was quite brutal. Purges were the norm and just like the Great Terror of the 1930âs, people lived in absolute fear. One area I have not studied much is in Korea. Near the end of Stalinâs life, Korea descended into civil war. Stalin did not play a huge role, but there was a role nonetheless.
His legacy is mixed. He did industrialize and bring Russia to become a super-power. His industrialization also led to Hitlerâs demise. His policies relating to the start of the Cold War cannot be looked at as him just trying to take over as much land as possible. He, and much of Europe were genuinely frightened of the Germans. His actions to divide Europe were out of protection, not imperialism. But the brutality of his regime cannot be justified. An estimated 20 million people were killed under his rule. His people lived in constant fear, as well as those who lived in Eastern Europe. Take the good with the bad. He boosted the economy which led to the defeat of Nazi Germany, while ruling with an iron fist. Does the good outweigh the bad? Thatâs up for you to decide.
Darn Microsoft Word. Here's a repost with the corrections:
Stalin is the person I have studied the most in my pursuit of a history degree. I could write a book about what I personally believe. But I'll keep it short.
He was a brilliant tactician. He knew how to play the system and reach the top. Lenin wrote several letter to help stop Stalin from rising to the top. Stalin intercepted all these letters and hid them. He out-maneuvered Trotsky, the man who was supposed to succeed Lenin, very well.
His purges and cult of personality were terrible. He convinced the masses that he was continuing Lenin's plans. The purges in the 1930's (The Great Terror) were horrible. After the assassination of a close advisor, Stalin ordered millions arrested and killed to stamp out any opposition. His worst act was the Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor). He deliberately took food from the Ukrainian regions to redistribute it among Russia. The food was rarely give back to the public and the attack was simply to punish the Kulaks (rich Ukrainian farmers) for opposing Communism. 7-8 million Ukrainians starved to death in 9 months. That's months, not years. There was weather factors involved. Ukraine had the lowest rainfall in decades. Not all deaths can be attributed to Stalin, but he was responsible for many.
His industrialization plans for Russia were quite astounding. Russia had been far behind compared to the Western world. His plans to industrialize were massive, and also fulfilled. During the great depression, most of the world was poor and starving. Russia's economy throughout the 1930's increased by over 250%. They were the only country in the world not to be hit by the depression.
The industrialization was enough to put up a fight against Nazi Germany. Initially, the Soviets were devastated by the war. But after the bloody victory at Stalingrad, the Soviets were able to single-handedly fight back the Germans. 80% of all casualties in the European theater were on the Eastern Front. 27 million Soviets died in the war. But because of Stalin's mass production of technology, arms, mines, etc., they were able to win the war.
Right after WWII, and before the Cold War started, the Russians were scared to death of the Germans. Germany had devastated Russia twice in just over 30 years. Stalin called for a weak Germany so they could not attack the Russians again. It only made sense. The warmongering Germans had killed about 40 million Russians in two wars. Almost every country in the world feared Germany and wanted them to be weakened. The United States, on the other hand, called for a strong democratic Germany. This would make sure that they did not look to another dictator to lead them. It was very risky, and the Stalin refused to allow it. To weaken Germany, he had the Soviets take over the areas they controlled in hopes that a non-unified Germany would be took weak to cause a future war. He also made sure that the rest of Eastern Europe was allied with the Soviets to act as a buffer zone in case of an attack.
I'm not trying to justify Stalin's actions. But I'm trying to create some historical empathy here. If you were the leader of the Soviet Union after WWII, you would probably be scared to death of the Germans as well. In your mind, the US is crazy to call for a unified, strong Germany. The only real way to counter this is to take over your half of Germany and keep the Germans from unifying. And again, most of Europe sided with Stalin on the German question. So this was not just Stalin trying to take over as much territory as possible. There was a mass fear of the Germans, and Stalin was simply trying to protect Russia from future attack.
Could there have been less brutality? Of course. Stalin's reign in Eastern Europe was quite brutal. Purges were the norm and just like the Great Terror of the 1930's, people lived in absolute fear. One area I have not studied much is in Korea. Near the end of Stalin's life, Korea descended into civil war. Stalin did not play a huge role, but there was a role nonetheless.
His legacy is mixed. He did industrialize and bring Russia to become a super-power. His industrialization also led to Hitler's demise. His policies relating to the start of the Cold War cannot be looked at as him just trying to take over as much land as possible. He, and much of Europe were genuinely frightened of the Germans. His actions to divide Europe were out of protection, not imperialism. But the brutality of his regime cannot be justified. An estimated 20 million people were killed under his rule. His people lived in constant fear, as well as those who lived in Eastern Europe. Take the good with the bad. He boosted the economy which led to the defeat of Nazi Germany, while ruling with an iron fist. Does the good outweigh the bad? Thats up for you to decide.
Satan was supposed to be with God as an angel but he/she(i don't think theres gender in heaven) and a few other angels tried to overthrow God so God banished him and improsined him till .... i think 1000 years or so
Stalin is a communist who is a bourgeoisie at heart and mind. He did an awful job at representing the interests of the people! I personally would have had Stalin shot and Trotsky brought into power. This probably would save millions of people's lives! It's a shame, however, that everyone says "oh yeah, well the reason why Stalin did that is because he's a communist silly!" I wouldd like to thank thelistman for knowing what he's saying.
Ah, Stalin, a great example showing that being a dictator is the worst possible type of leader.
If you mean with worst, dreaded, then I might agree. There are worse leaders than Stalin. Don't forget in the first place Stalin is one of the men who've beaten Hitler. Though he knew Hitler would betray him he did nothing for it so he indeed isn't the best leader there's. But there've been enough even worse leaders in history so I think Stalin wasn't a genius but knows how to command troops once a war has begun. Preparations aren't his things and he and his troops were quite dreaded aswell.
Stalin wasn't a genius but knows how to command troops once a war has begun.
Stalin had nothing to do with commanding troops during the war. He was a figurehead and claimed all the glory for victory. Yes, his industrialization helped win the war. But it was his generals, especially Zhukov, who won the war on the ground.
Stalin had nothing to do with commanding troops during the war. He was a figurehead and claimed all the glory for victory. Yes, his industrialization helped win the war. But it was his generals, especially Zhukov, who won the war on the ground.
That is true, the generals of Russia were doing the greater part. But Stalin helped recovering russia After opertation Barbarossa.
That is true, the generals of Russia were doing the greater part. But Stalin helped recovering russia After opertation Barbarossa.
False again. Stalin was a figurehead in the war. In fact, he made some very bad decisions, which may have lengthened the war and increased suffering. Retreat was not allowed, even if there was no chance of victory. One general asked Stalin to make a law to prevent Soviet soldiers from r aping foreign women. Stalin simply told the general to let the soldiers have some fun. He allowed the execution of hundreds of thousands of people as well.
Stalin really did nothing during the war to help. He just terrorized more and more, while prolonging the war.
He just wasn't taking over and was killing Russians, so nobody said anything. He was a flipping madman... His idea was basically "Kill a million and save ten million".... Now, I believe the death toll under him (non war related) goes from 8.5 millon - 60 million, depending on who you believe... I believe most agree on 20 million though. Hitler killed what? 11 million....
False again. Stalin was a figurehead in the war. In fact, he made some very bad decisions, which may have lengthened the war and increased suffering. Retreat was not allowed, even if there was no chance of victory. One general asked Stalin to make a law to prevent Soviet soldiers from r aping foreign women. Stalin simply told the general to let the soldiers have some fun. He allowed the execution of hundreds of thousands of people as well.
I was talking about the figurehead yes. I didn't know about the general asking about the raping, and I know Stalin was a real bad leader to allow it. I now see why Stalinrad was renamed to Wolgorad.
He just wasn't taking over and was killing Russians, so nobody said anything. He was a flipping madman... His idea was basically "Kill a million and save ten million".... Now, I believe the death toll under him (non war related) goes from 8.5 millon - 60 million, depending on who you believe... I believe most agree on 20 million though. Hitler killed what? 11 million....
Stalin was known to be a real mauler, but then again it's happened in russia before stalin too.
