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

Having read Koestler's novel, how would you characterize Soviet society in the 1930s? Was it dominated by terror and purges?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"Having read Koestler's novel, how would you characterize Soviet society in the 1930s? Was it dominated by terror and purges?" Upon reading Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon and studying other works written on Soviet society in the 1930's it is evident that it was a time dominated by violence, fear and one man's monomania. People lived in a constant state of alert and nervousness which we cannot relate to in Canada today. A culture of helplessness and fear grasped Russia and would only be lifted with an end to the tyranny running the country. The 1930s saw the execution of millions of Russian citizens by their own leader in an attempt to stabilize his power base at any expense. Joseph Stalin, leader of the communist party, was a man obsessed with achieving his goals. As he became more powerful, it became increasing difficult to make a distinction between his personal goals and those of the entire country as he forced his beliefs upon his people and party. He believed that Russia had to modernize or it would perish. ...read more.

Middle

Such was the case at times during Rubashov's forty years in the party. He saw friends and even lovers sent to their deaths for reasons he did not agree with. He was in a position to save them but did not. He realized that if he tried to save them he too would be silenced. Many people, both civilians and military personnel, would have found themselves in similar positions. During show trials when bogus evidence was presented there were undoubtedly people present who could disprove it but did not because it was unsafe to do so. The culture of fear and paranoia prevented people from crying foul and seeking justice. The sense of community was lost as neighbors were suspicious of each other or, as in the Ukraine during the famines, even competed for scarce resources to survive. There, the peasants were forced to give up their crops and starve. The only justification they were given was that they were doing their country a great service. 2 People who did speak out or organized opposition against Stalin were handled brutally, eliminated without hesitation. ...read more.

Conclusion

They would have died for reasons such as suggesting plans different from those of Stalin.3 Rubashov, having spent forty years in the service of the party, had seen many changes in society. What he and the original Bolshevik revolutionaries had set out to accomplish was not in place in the 1930s. He described life under Stalin as: "The Party denied the free will of the individual- and at the same time it exacted his willing self sacrifice. It denied his capacity to choose between two alternatives-and at the same time it demanded that he should constantly choose the right one."4 He realized that the goals he had initially set out to achieve as a revolutionary were now being pursued using terrible methods but ultimately was still unsure of whether it would all be worth it in the end. When Stalin took control of Russia the country was in a state of instability. He hoped to bring it to great power but went about according to his own will and without any thought of causalities. His obsession with his dream caused many wrongs to be committed. These injustices came to a peak in the 1930s during a time of great purges terror. This caused Russians to live in a culture of fear, suspicion, apprehensiveness and doubt. ...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 Political Philosophy 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 Political Philosophy essays

  1. 'Socialists have disagreed on both the means and ends of socialism' - Discuss

    and the welfare state - they believe in the redistribution of wealth through progressive taxation and the welfare system. So, rather than central planning they advocate economic management, and whereas communists would support state collectivisation, social democrats are in favour of a more moderate mixed economy.

  2. Socialist uses of workers' inquiry

    Are you aware of any cases when the government intervened to protect the workers from the extortions of the employers and their illegal associations? 93. Does the government strive to secure the observance of the existing factory laws against the interests of the employers?

  1. Iran Country Study

    * Division of Power Among Branches of the Government - The executive branch is bifurcated between the president and the supreme leader. The supreme leader is the country's most powerful political figure and has the authority to overrule or dismiss the president, appoint the head of the judiciary and half

  2. Russia's Political Party System as an Obstacle to Democratization

    by Rybkin-which were intended to represent the pro-Yeltsin forces and the loyal opposition respectively. The expectation was that the more moderate parties from both directions would gravitate toward these two blocs, strengthening the political center and weakening the extremist parties, such as the LDPR, that had done very well in 1993 (gaining the second most number of seats).

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