• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Critical Review of "Let History Judge" by Roy Medvedev. The concluding chapter of this book describes the last years of Stalins life. It describes, following Stalins 70th birthday, how the old despot became more and more suspicious .

Extracts from this document...


Critical Review Let History Judge, Roy Medvedev The concluding chapter of this book describes the last years of Stalin's life. It describes, following Stalin's 70th birthday, how "the old despot became more and more suspicious ". It describes that his paranoia extended to such lengths that he was nearly living in complete isolation, the woods surrounding where he lived would be filled with traps and mines, his personal bodyguard grew in number greatly, and all who had an audience with him where thoroughly searched. This suspicion resulted in considerable danger to anyone who dared challenge Stalin, to argue or dispute him "was equivalent to suicide ". Stalin became suspicious of even his most trusted aides, Molotov and Poskrebshev's wives were arrested, and Kaganovich's brother was driven to suicide. These once trusted men were driven away from important decision making, Stalin even publicly declaring some of these, among others, as enemy spies. It goes on to describe Stalin's death through brain haemorrhage. The main part of this conclusive chapter poses the main ideas and questions concerning Stalin's rule, namely, did the costs of his reign, numerous as they are, outweigh the benefits to the communist movement, not only in Russia but the entire world. Medvedev gives the viewpoints from various perspectives; including bourgeois historians, Soviet, Interpretation from West German media, Marxist Historiography, socialist and revisionist, Dogmatists and Stalinists, other Communists interpretations from other countries (namely Communist China), and his own, Marxist-Leninist views. ...read more.


" A communist Chinese editorial from the newspaper People's Daily shared an equally lenient view saying "...Stalin did make certain mistakes...In the course of struggle to root out counterrevolution...many counter-revolutionaries who needed to be punished were justly punished, but innocent people were also mistakenly condemned. " Medvedev describes, to his obvious disgust, how the article goes on to conclude that Stalin mistakes were useful, for they provided a lesson to other communists. The second thesis of these groups is what Medvedev would call balancing; the groups concede that Stalin committed mistakes and crimes which were not necessarily needed for the building of socialism. But they also state that Stalin accomplished a great deal, and that if all his crimes and mistakes are weighed against his achievements and successes, the latter far outweighs the former. One dogmatist even stated that Stalin's record is 30% crime and 70% accomplishment. The Peking People's Daily stated in 1956 and 1963 that "If Stalin's merits are compared with his mistakes, his merits are greater than his mistakes. " Medvedev gives the argument against Stalinism in the concluding paragraphs. He states that "Genuine Communists "cannot answer the questions, which were greater, Stalin's accomplishments or crimes? This cannot be answered simply because this formulation contains the hidden suggestion that great merits give someone the right to commit certain crimes. ...read more.


an assault on old Bolshevik individuals that were "honourably serving the interests of the masses" In Medvedev eyes, Stalin was a hindrance to the Russian communist movement, not an aid to it; he believed that his few relatively insignificant merits, using the theory of balancing, were far fewer than his crimes and mistakes. He cited the philosopher G.Pomerants to illustrate his point "to restore respect for Stalin, knowing what he did, is to establish respect for denunciations, tortures, executions... is to set up a moral monstrosity near our banner... Even Stalin did not try to do that. " Medvedev clearly shows how different cultures, interpretations and perspectives viewed Stalin, but his personal opinions, although in his case justifiable, do not necessarily give an objective picture of what Stalin achieved (or failed to achieve) during his time of leadership. Medvedev describes Stalin's reign as a disease, which resulted in Russia losing "many of its finest sons "(very possibly referring to his father), he scrutinizes any opinion which glorifies Stalin, giving a clear opinion that Soviet Communist Russia progressed despite Stalin, not through him. A final quote succinctly illustrates Medvedev's viewpoint: "Stalin was for thirty years the helmsman of the ship of state, clutching its steering wheel with a grip of death. Dozens of times he steered it onto reefs and shoals and far off course. Shall we be grateful to him because he did not manage to sink it altogether? " ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. To what extent was Napoleon an enlightened despot?

    in his regime Napoleon personally reviewed plays, lectures, and posters, with several theatres being closed down. Napoleons tight censorship further illustrates his iron grip over his rule, even as far as stamping out expressive thought and ideas, in case they were damaging to him.

  2. "Stalin transformed the Soviet Union from a backward country into a strong modern state ...

    Corollary, for the industrial situation to improve, Stalin needed more workers and to have more workers Russia needed to produce more food. In order to produce the amount of grain needed for this concentrated upheaval of industrial Russia, the farming system was forced to change from a selection of individual

  1. Identified within this study is the argument that whilst many of Lenin's theories and ...

    A different outlook to that of Pipes' comes from Sheila Fitzpatrick, a revisionist historian in no way connected to Cold War politics. Having had access to many previously unavailable documents she states that democratic socialism was by no means a sham and in fact 'party members could freely debate issues

  2. To What Extent was Stalin's Personal Paranoia the Main Reason for the Purges?

    This implies that Lenin would have done the same had his leadership been as 'shakily based'.4 The compliance of many of the Party members and the willingness to confess can also be partly explained by Lenin's stance towards the Party line.

  1. Compare the Characters and beliefs of Lenin and Stalin

    By 1917, he had become the editor of Pravda, the Bolshevik newspaper and had taken a minor role in the Bolshevik seizure of power. Stalin was a loyal Bolshevik who supposedly supported Lenin and was in charge of the party organisation before he came dictator.

  2. How far did the achievements of Stalin's economic modernisation programme justify the costs?

    they met targets even if this was untrue; this led to the system showing that it was working where in fact this was not the case. The scapegoat for these shortcomings was the 'bourgeois specialists'. They were accused of deliberately holding up supply and causing breakdowns.

  1. Evaluate historical comparisons of Hitler and Stalin and their regimes

    The Gestapo and the NKVD, "were brutal and participated in state sponsored violence."22 Terror was fundamental within both regimes and was used as a method of controlling the nation. In the 1930s both regimes prioritised war economy but the difference was that the Nazi party glorified war as it developed

  2. The Impact of Stalins Leadership in the USSR, 1924 1941. Extensive notes

    Subject to mood swings. 5. Seriously underestimated his opponents. Lev Kamenev: Sent into exile in Siberia at the settlement where Stalin was exiled. He returned to Petrograd in 1917, where he allied with Zinoviev in opposing Lenin?s wishes for an uprising against the Provisional government, on the grounds that the Bolshevik party did not have enough support.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work