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

Evaluation on the Effect of Stalin's Economic and Social Policies

Extracts from this document...


18/10/04 Evaluation on the Effect of Stalin's Economic and Social Policies Julie Nelson One of Russia's most prominent political leaders of all time, was a man named Joseph Dzhugashvili. A man, who at one time was being trained to become a priest, and would one day become a major revolutionary in the history of the USSR. The name that Stalin went by was not his given name, but one meaning "man of steel," that he made up. Stalin's rule is one of history's more controversial topics and still, even years after his rampant rule in the USSR between 1927 and 1940, certain policies and events must be evaluated, in order to come to a conclusion about whether there is justification in what he did to achieve his goals. During his time in power he dictated many new policies and several of the policies created by Lenin, were thrown out. He was ruthless and cold-heartedly showed no one mercy during his reign, but because of him and some of the cruel policies that he enforced, Russia became a super power. Some of Stalin's economic policies that he so barbarously enforced were good for the economy of the USSR, but took a devastating toll on the people who had to carry it out. One of these policies was The Five Year Plans. There were three Five Year Policies in total, implemented from 1928 to 1941, which did the economy of the USSR a long awaited boost. ...read more.


Although it may have helped to fund the 5 Year Plans, thousands had to die for it. Lastly, Stalin's Communist policy was one that affected the economy too. Stalin was very against capitalism, even on a small scale, like the Kulaks. The idea of communism was very popular amongst the citizens, especially the younger people in Russia, because it promised a better life. I think that it was a good policy, but it too had its bad points. Total communism is nearly impossible to create in the short time frame that Stalin expected everyone to do it in. He also had no room for compromise, such as with the Kulaks, which lead to revolt. His political views also made the rest of the world fearful and unwilling to collaborate with Russia, which left the country with no market. Communism was a popular political ideology at the time, but I believe that Stalin went about it the wrong way, and made it more of a dictatorship. Things in the social aspect of life in Russia, dramatically changed from the time that Lenin was in power, to when Stalin came to power and began implementing his policies. One of those policies, was the newly acquired rights of women. The idea of women entering the workforce and having the same rights to citizenship as men, sounds as if it would be a good idea, but it did not turn out to be all positive results. ...read more.


It was the purges that swayed my thinking in the category, because I think that anyone who can murder just on the fact that someone might have spoken out against you politically, is not fit to rule a country. Socially, Stalin did not try make the life of the average man or woman in the USSR at the time, any easier, or more pleasurable, so it is my evaluation that he was not a fit leader. Overall, in all categories of his regime, he did not succeed in very many ways, and not enough for me to think of him as being a good leader. A good leader would have been able to achieve the things that he wanted, without having to kill or imprison anyone who made him feel threatened. Stalin was in a horrible state of depression, and the whole country of Russia was affected by his anxiety. He may have put the USSR up at the top of the industrial world at the time, but the ways that helped him get there, were not right. His promise of communism turned into more of a dictatorship than anything and his overbearing fears, made him a weak leader. The only policies that were good, that seemed to have no negative effect on the people of Russia, were free education and free medical care. So, my evaluation is that two out of many policies is not a good enough success rate for me to be able to honestly say that I think Stalin was a good leader. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 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 GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. The Policies of Joseph Stalin 1928 1953

    The source agrees that Stalin was a "very skilled, indeed gifted politician" this is an accurate judgement because to reach the position of "supreme leader" and to maintain his authority he had to be a good politician. Politicians aim to lead their countries to success by running their policies.

  2. Stalin and the Five Year Plans

    They also showed that not all the leaders of Russia were complete idiots that did absolutely nothing for their country. The five-year plans showed that good leadership and powerful ideas were something that could come out of Russia and take the world by storm.

  1. “Collectivisation was a political success but an economic failure and a human disaster” discuss.

    on a world wide scale it would seem that collectivisation was a political disaster, many countries who already held Russia in the lowest possible regard saw all the negatives that were coming out of this programme so Russia's world wide popularity decreased even more.

  2. How successful were Stalins Economic Policies?

    while in the same timescale the USA's percent share fell from 43 percent to 28 percent. It is true that hardly any of the targets set at the beginning of the Five Year Plans were achieved, but this was because Stalin stopped each Five Year Plan a year early, announcing their targets had been met, when they actually hadn't.

  1. 'The Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people' - ...

    The rapid industrialisation improved life for most people in the cities as the new huge steel mills erecting at Magnitogorsk in the Urals and the new dams and hydroelectric powers (providing the heavy industries' energy requirements) had become sheer employment centres.

  2. 'The Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people.' How ...

    its own public, 'bourgeois experts' were crushed as they were reminders of the 'old system'. A new Socialist community was created due to the introduction of Collectivisation, rapid Industrialisation and other new rules and systems which was laid down by the Five Year Plans.

  1. Stalin: Man Or Monster?

    Stalin was a paranoid man afraid that everyone was plotting to overthrow him. After the murder of Kirov he really started purging not only the country but also his own government. At least one in three of all the army officers in the army were executed with little or no reason given.

  2. " Stalin was an evil dictator whose rule did nothing to improve Russia".

    Looking at all the sources it is difficult to decide whether Stalin's dictatorship did anything to improve Russia. In Stalin's dictatorship, the area most highlighted was the number of murders throughout his rule. The evil dictator had the right idea (to revolutionise Russia and bring it into the modern world)

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