• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12

Stalin man or monster

Extracts from this document...


STALIN- MAN OR MONSTER? 1) Study Sources A, B and C. Do these Sources give similar of different impressions of Stalin? Explain your answer with references to the Sources. (8) 2) Study source D. Does this source provide any useful evidence about Stalin? Explain your answer. (7) 3) Study sources E and F. which of these two sources is the more reliable? Explain your answer. (8) 4) Study Sources G and H. Do you trust Khrushchev's assessments of Stalin? Use your knowledge of Stalin to explain your answer. (7) 5) Study Sources I and J. How far do these Sources agree about Stalin's "show trials?" Explain your answer. (8) 6) Using the sources in this paper and your knowledge of Stalin explain whether or not you think he was a monster. (12) ********* 1) Study Sources A, B and C. Do these Sources give similar of different impressions of Stalin? Explain your answer with references to the Sources. (8) Sources A, B and C are sources published throughout the nineteen thirties. All three sources give a separate insight into Stalin's different policies which where inflicted on his own nation, where many people suffered. In this essay I will first outline the points given in each Source and the message behind them, then counter argue the different impressions each source depicts on Stalin's personality and the similarities between the sources. Source A portrays Stalin presenting a pyramid of Skulls. His facial expressions are presented to be dark and menacing this immediately reflects the evilness within Stalin's personality. Subdued in the back round are pyramids of skulls with dead crows feeding off the remains and a large blurb that reads "Visitez U.R.S.S ses Pyrmides" (visit the pyramids of the USSR). The title is bolded and written in capitals and looks as though it has been stamped, this makes the picture look punchy and dramatic. The Source could be suggesting one of two evil policies which took place within the time frames of the source. ...read more.


This statement was partly true, as if he didn't take this stand, quoted as being a "mad deposit", then Stalin wouldn't of introduced policies such as industrialisation, where it was an advantage to the "party and the working masses". Even his policies such collectivisation which where initially regarded as awful where introduced not to terrorise peasants but to end forced exploitation of peasants by greedy landlords and get rid of the greedy and troublesome Kulaks. It helped peasants work together and provided large scale organisation of food production for the farms where perks and other offerings where offered. However, there were darker sides to those policies, such as collectivisation which was forced and the Kulaks were scapegoats for inefficient food production. The policy led to the murder and deportation of millions of people to prisons and labour camps, this resulted with kulaks destroying crops and animals caused by famine killing more people. Also industrialisation and other severe problems such as the five year plans, here industrial zones were set up provided workers with very poor housing and amnesties. Long hours were worked for low pay, most of the targets where unrealistic and much of the work was done by the inmates of forced labour camps, criminals and political prisoners. Source H portrays Khrushchev portraying Stalin as a "distrustful man" and very a "suspicious" person. This is true as it is also reflected in his policies well known for killing millions of peoples such as the purges, where millions where taken to gulags and sentenced to death because of suspicion this "general distrust" he saw in people was why he began to purge people after the death of Kirov. Loyal Bolsheviks such as Bukharin and Kamenev were sent to the gulags and killed because of suspicion that they where being traitors of state. The gulags were a place of torture where inmates would eventually "confess" to anything. ...read more.


However, it is significant for me to analyse sources produced by both communist and capitalist nations as it will increase my insight into their ideologies. After discussing the various views of whether Stalin was a man or monster I have reached a decision where I believe he is neither. Some would think that it would be out of balance to call Stalin a blood thirsty monster, as the slaughtering of people in his mind was because he was consciously convinced what he was doing the best for his country. As he also introduced the five year plans where it was an advantage to the Soviet Union as a whole and his policy of collectivisation was in essence bringing together the unity of people together. Yet at the same time the methods he implemented this was in vile and vicious way. In addition to this, he was corrupt giving party "apparatchiks" the easy way out. However calling Stalin a monster would indicate that he done no good to his country and was a person who slaughtered people for fun thus I believe that Stalin is a man deluded and paranoid because of the people he was surrounded by influenced in the childhood he grew up in. Thus I would agree to source M which in my opinion the most accurate and fairest source in the paper as it portrays both the good and the bad Stalin has done and the "darker side" to his personality. Even though the source was published by the allies the fact it was published five years before the collapse of communism has made the editor become more neutral giving more justice to Stalin rather then the exaggerated accounts of Stalin being a beast or an idol. Concluding this essay I believe that Stalin was neither a man nor a monster. Comparing Stalin to dictators like Hitler and Mussolini all these three leaders had a common theme between each other. Each leader was surrounded by paranoia of creating a perfect world where their enemies didn't exist. A dream neither of them could fulfill. ...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 Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people.' How ...

    A strong economy would also ensure provide a strong power base for Stalin, which would help to ensure his remaining in power. As many countries from the West were threatening Russia, Stalin needed to prepare Russia for war if it was to come to that.

  2. Stalin Man or Monster

    In both source A and source B is Stalin shown taking pride in his achievements. Source A tries to show the malevolence of Stalin as it shows how he is proud that his plan resulted in the death of over 10 million Russian people.

  1. How did Stalin control Russia from 1924-1953?

    The practice of mass arrest, torture, and imprisonment or execution, without fair trial, of anyone suspected by the Stalin's Secret Police of opposing Stalin's regime became commonplace. People were encouraged to betray on each other, and constantly lived in fear of not being able to trust anyone.

  2. Lenin's Role in History

    Under the treaty, Russia lost Riga, Lithuania, Livonia, Estonia and some of White Russia. These areas had great economic importance as they were some of the most fertile farming areas in Western Russia. Lenin's practical and realistic approach enabled him to strengthen the Bolshevik party even more.

  1. The USSR under Stalin, 1924-1941 - source related questions.

    It suggests that collectivisation was not entirely voluntary and that those that disagreed, mainly kulaks, paid the ultimate price.[c1] Both sources are official sources from Stalin and talk about the collectivisation policy although the views expressed sharply contradict each other.

  2. Why Did Stalin Use Terror and Purges in Such a Comprehensive Way during the ...

    From February 1937 Stalin's government began to destroy the 'middle level apparat by the rank and file activists'. This presented an opportunity to hold local Party leaders responsible for all social and economic failures. It was also an opportunity for ordinary Party members to give release to envy and seek promotion by destroying rivals.

  1. Was Stalin a Disaster For the Soviet Union?

    Collectivisation was Stalin's first big idea. To leave behind an age where every farmer is starving to survive on what he can manage to grow for himself not to mention the great famine and concealing of crop harvests. Stalin saw great farms, farms covering many fields and all worked on by farmers who would control and equally share the harvest.

  2. What methods did Stalin use to control the Soviet Union?

    In all, collectivization had caused tremendous damage to the lives of peasants and farmers but gave Stalin more power and control over the Soviet Union even though it was not a completely finished method. Industrialization was another method introduced however this was directed towards the industry.

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