Stalin: man or monster Sources Questions
Stalin: man or monster
. Sources b and c give a similar view of stalin as a good man, but source a gives the opposite view of stalin as a monster.
In source b stalin is shown with the workers at a hydroelectric power station. He is in the centre of the picture standing tall and looking healthy. If people saw this they would see a man who commands respect, is centre of attention and is a great man.
Stalin is relaxed in the painting and along with the workers he is smiling as they show him the power station. He is standing in front of the station so people would see how successful he was with his five year plans, he was showing people what he could build and how great Russia looked.
Being with the workers shows stalin as a man of the people, a man who cares about his workers who are the men who are trying to make Russia succeed in its five year plans. He is grateful for his peoples work.
In the painting stalin is dressed in white, not only so that he stands out but white is also a sign of purity and goodness. Stalins strong stance shows him as a man of power who has respect and authority.
In source c stalin is shown congratulating the wives of army officers. The women are all happy and smiling and delighted to meet stalin. They are reaching out for stalin desperate to shake his hand and the picture gives the impression that these people loved stalin and I am sure that is the image he wanted people to see.
Stalin is again shown as a man of the people who wants to thank his army men for their efforts to make Russia succeed.
Source a is entirely different to b and c. stalin is shown as a monster and someone who kills many people. Stalin is shown standing in front of pyramids of dead bodies, he has no emotion on his face showing he had no disgust for the deaths. There are vultures feeding off the bodies as they have not been buried they have just been piled upon one another as no one seems to care for them.
2. Source d is an account from stalins past from his days in Siberia. It shows stalin as a man of the people. Stalin wanted people to see him as someone who cares for his country and people. The source is from stalin himself and may not be truthful but it is an image that stalin wanted to portray of himself. It is part of propaganda when stalin say's how other leaders don't care about the Russian people but he does.
Stalin tells about how he cares for his people but we know about much of the hardship they suffered. People were sent to labour camps in awful conditions in Siberia for speaking out against the government or even just not meeting their work targets. The kulaks are another example of stalin not caring about his people when an entire race of them were wiped out even killed by the communist regime.
This is probably not a truthful piece and just propaganda by stalin to give an impression of himself that he wanted people to believe and also to give a bad impression of rival opponents.
3. Source e is a speech published in the communist newspaper pravada, which means truth. But it is anything but the truth. The communists to make them look good censor everything put in the paper. The source is definitely not reliable. The writer was probably told what to write and the letter published as propaganda so people would think stalin was a great man. A professional writer and not your everyday worker wrote the letter.
It has been written very much like a prayer, which worships stalin like a god. The use of thy name is used often used like a prayer.
Source e tells how everyday Russians adored stalin but we know that many disliked him and his regime because of the great hardship they suffered under his reign. Many were set extraordinary work targets and being punished if they could not meet them. They were docked pay or food and some were even sent to Siberia AND THE GULAG.
SOURCE K ALSO SINGS STALIN PRAISES AND AGAIN THIS IS CENSORED AS IT WAS WRITTEN DURING STALINS REIGN.
SOURCE F IS A SPEECH FROM PARIS BY AN OLD SUPPORTER OF STALINS. THE MAN NAMED BUKHARIN KNEW STALIN WELL SO WE CAN RELY THAT THE SOURCE IS A GOOD OPINION OF STALIN. BUKHARIN WAS DISGRACED BY STALIN IN 1929 AND FELT A GREAT DISLIKE FOR HIM. AS THE PIECE IS WRITTEN IN 1936 WE KNOW THE SPEECH MAY HAVE BEEN BIAST BUT IT WAS BUKHARINS HONEST OPINION AND UNCENSORED.
IN FRANCE PEOPLE HAD THEIR FREEDOM OF SPEECH. ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
SOURCE K ALSO SINGS STALIN PRAISES AND AGAIN THIS IS CENSORED AS IT WAS WRITTEN DURING STALINS REIGN.
SOURCE F IS A SPEECH FROM PARIS BY AN OLD SUPPORTER OF STALINS. THE MAN NAMED BUKHARIN KNEW STALIN WELL SO WE CAN RELY THAT THE SOURCE IS A GOOD OPINION OF STALIN. BUKHARIN WAS DISGRACED BY STALIN IN 1929 AND FELT A GREAT DISLIKE FOR HIM. AS THE PIECE IS WRITTEN IN 1936 WE KNOW THE SPEECH MAY HAVE BEEN BIAST BUT IT WAS BUKHARINS HONEST OPINION AND UNCENSORED.
IN FRANCE PEOPLE HAD THEIR FREEDOM OF SPEECH. OTHER SOURCES LIKE M AND J, WHICH WERE WRITTEN OUTSIDE RUSSIA, CRITICISED STALIN AND AGAIN THESE WERE UNCENSORED AND PROBABLY CLOSER TO THE TRUTH.
I BELIEVE SOURCE F IS MORE RELIABLE IT WAS BUKHARINS HONEST OPINION, ALTHOUGH BIAST, IT WAS UNCENSORED. SOURCE E IS CENSORED SO MAY WELL NOT BE AN HONEST OPINION AND IS A CLEAR CASE OF PROPAGANDA TO MAKE STALIN AND HIS PARTY LOOK GREAT
4. Sources g and h are from a speech by Khrushchev, stalins successor, in 1956.
Khrushchev was a loyal follower of Stalin and was well trusted by him.
We may well trust Khrushchev assessments because we know he was friends with Stalin and had a good knowledge of what he was like. He agreed with stalins policies and carried them on when he got in power but with less terror and more goods for the public like food. Stalin liked and trusted Khrushchev, putting him in charge of the Moscow underground project, which was very important for Russia and Stalin. If Stalin had not trusted Khrushchev he would have had him fired or even killed in the purges.
Khrushchev might not tell the truth because he was making a public speech and so may well of been saying what he wanted people to believe rather than the truth. In 1956 Khrushchev spoke of wanting to make a fresh start or "de-stalinisation". Khrushchev may well of made this speech wanting people to forget Stalin and give him a chance.
In source g Khrushchev said that although Stalin used terror, he only wanted the best for his country. Stalin had used terror to wipe out the kulaks so he could carry out his policy of collective farming and be able to feed the people in city's and towns. My knowledge also agrees with Khrushchev because we know stalins motto "socialism in one country". He wanted to build up the industry to make Russia more powerful and a better place for the future generations. Stalin increased production of steel 3 times, coal 5 times, oil 4 times and production on agricultural machinery 30 times. This shows that Stalin didn't just say he was going to achieve these things to please the people he actually did because he wanted to make Russia powerful.
In source Khrushchev said that Stalin was a distrustful man, He was very insecure and saw enemies and spies everywhere. We know this is true because of the purges, in which Stalin had many officials killed believing they were plotting against him and his party. Leaders like rykov and Bukharin, form source f, were killed during the show trials.
Therefore I believe I can trust Khrushchev's speech because of his knowledge and the evidence I have to back it up.
5. Sources I and j are cartoons drawn in America and France about their views on the show trials.
Source I shows four smartly dressed men admitting their guilt in court. The men are over acting and look like actors. The cartoonist wants the men to look like actors as if they are reading off scripts. There is hang mans noose in the background of the cartoon and from evidence we know that people were made to admit by threatening them and this is what the cartoonist is implying that the men have seen the noose and have admitted there guilt in fear be it true or not. We can see the men smiling when they admit which is highly unusual and gives the impression that something isn't quite right with the trial.
Source j shows a judge, barrister, court room Clark and a jury and all the men are the same person, Stalin. The implication is that Stalin has total control in what happens in these trials and all the people in the courtroom do as he says. The defendant is in a situation that whatever Stalin decides goes.
Both cartoons are saying that there is something wrong with the trials, that they're not legal. Both have Stalin as the head of the trial and agree that Stalin is the most influential person in them. Whatever he decides goes. But source I makes the point that the trials are fixed by terror with the defendants being told what to say as where source j says that no matter what the defendant says it comes down to what Stalin decides.
6.
Sources l and m are parts of biography's written in for publish in Britain, long after Stalins death.
We know we are able to believe both sources because being written after Stalin's death and in Britain shows they were not censored. Though being from Britain they could be biased sources.
From the dates they are written, 1983 and 1974, we know the writers are writing in hindsight and know the facts of what happened during Stalins reign. They also had many years in which to do there researched.
Both sources go some way to criticise Stalin with source l saying Stalin had a dark and evil side. Source m goes much further using words to describe Stalin such as "corrupted", "ruthless", "monstrous tyrant" and "user of terror".
Source m does not say any good things about Stalin but source l does begin its piece praising Stalin as a "very skilled and gifted politician". This is where the pieces differ.
7.
Stalin. Man or monster? I am going to demonstrate whether or not Stalin was a man or monster.
In many sources Stalin is shown as a bad person. Source a shows Stalin, as someone who is proud of the many deaths he has caused and his face shows no remorse for the deaths. Source f describes Stalin as "a malicious man" and "a devil". Source I shows that Stalin would force people to admit their guilt, be it true or not, and then have them killed.
We know Stalin carried out this act during the purges in which he became paranoid and had many officials, such as pyatakov and Kamenev, killed because he believed they were traitors.
Source l tells how Stalin had "a dark side and evil side" and source m describes him as "a user of terror", "ruthless" and "a monstrous tyrant".
There are many examples that we can use of Stalins past that make him seem like a monster. In Stalins rise to power he fought for leadership with Trotsky. Stalin had Trotsky frozen out of the party, he rubbished Trotsky's idea of collective farming and later, when he got in power, stole it and took the credit for it. Stalin later had Trotsky killed in Mexico, 1940. During Stalins plans for collective farming he wiped out an entire race of kulaks so that he could carry out his plans and stop the independent farming movement. The kulaks were making good profits on their own and protested against collectivisation. The government simply killed anyone who protested.
Stalin had treated criminals and anti communist campaigners very badly. He sent many to Siberia and made them trek in appalling conditions in which in some cases more died on the trek than survived. If people survived the trek they would find horrendous conditions in the camps. One in five workers died in year in one camp and people were shot for not working hard enough. The workers worked up to 16 hours a day.
As in source I we can use the purges as an act of evil.
Foreigners first saw Stalin as evil when he signed the nazi soviet pact. They saw it as selling out to the devil and we know he had divided up Poland. The division of Poland could be seen as evil because the Russians thought they had the right over another country to divide it and rule it.
We can use Stalin's family as another sign of his cruelness.
Stalin's first son was called yakov. He and Stalin did not get along and yakov once tried to kill himself after his father prevented his marriage. Stalin did not help his son or comfort him, he simply laughed at his sons inability to even kill himself.
It is believed that Stalin had also pushed his second wife, nadezdhe, to suicide. His daughter, svetlana, had described Stalin as "cold and calculated".
But not everyone believed Stalin was a monster and many people thought Stalin was a great man. In some camps the prisoners actually cried when Stalin died because they thought he was a god. We may be able to explain this though by saying that the prisoners have been told for years that Stalin is a god and have been forced to worship him. If people are made to do this then over time they will start to believe it.
Stalin was a determined communist and was sent to Siberia for his beliefs during the tsars' reign. Though he never gave in and continued in his beliefs. He was a key member in creating the communist party and his belief was that Russia must come first. He would not spend time helping others. Stalin's motto was "socialism in one country" he was determined to do the best for Russia and make it a strong world power.
When Stalin was training to become a priest he decided to become a Marxist because he wanted to dedicate his life to the people. There are examples of just how dedicated Stalin was to make Russia great, during the five-year plans Russia greatly improved, especially industry. In the first five-year plans the production of coal and oil increased four times, steel increased 3 times and the production of tractors increased 30 times. Stalin had wanted to modernise Russia because of his fear that Russia would be attacked by the western powers.
In the first five year plans the number of doctors increased in Russia. Stalin had made schools better and people of all ages began to read and write. Housing was better and unemployment was at an all time low.
The five-year plans were successful and Stalin succeeded in bringing Russia closer to the modern west. The Russian people had never had it so good if you do not count the gulag.
Stalin justified the nazi- soviet pact by saying that it was a pact, which gave them more time to build their army. Stalin felt that if he had not signed the pact then Germany would not have attacked and the pact was necessary to prevent this.
Even some foreigners saw good in Stalin. H.g wells described Stalin as "candid, fair and honest". The American ambassador to America, Joseph Davies, described, in a letter to his daughter that Stalin, that Stalin was "composed and wise" and Stalin had "kindness and gentle simplicity".
Some of the sources also give a good impression of Stalin.
Source b shows Stalin and someone who has achieved a lot for a country and along with source c he is a man of the people
Source d also reflects this telling how Stalin is a man of the people who cares for their well being. Source e is a letter, which sings Stalins praises and describes him as an "inspired leader". Source k and l also praise his political ability's calling him a "brilliant leader" and "a skilled and gifted politician".
Many Russians also believe that without Stalin Russia would have lost the war and so the people loved him for this.
Looking at both sides of the argument I believe that Stalin was either a great man or a monster. I believe that Stalin had done everything he did for the good of his country and there is a lack of evidence saying that Stalin took pleasure in the killing of THE MANY RUSSIAN PEOPLE THAT LOST THEIR LIVES. THIS WOULD MAKE IT SEEM THAT I BELIEVE STALIN WAS A MAN BUT I CANNOT JUSTIFY THE AMOUNT AND THE HORRENDOUS WAY THE MILLIONS OF RUSSIAN PEOPLE WERE KILLED. A GREAT MAN WOULD HAVE ACHIEVED WHAT STALIN HAD DONE BUT WITH A MINIMAL LOSS OF LIFE.
8. there is much disagreement about stalin and whether he was a good or bad person.
Many people throughout history believe stalin was a great leader. Source b shows him standing in front of a newly built hydroelectric power station. It is a painting that makes him look powerful and strong, he is showing off what he has achieved as a leader. It was painted in the 1930's during the era of socialist realism art. Stalin had ordered some of the paintings and had them doctored to make him look as great as possible. This may be a reason why the source is not reliable but there is evidence that stalin did achieve a lot in power with new canals and power stations built. Source c also makes him look like a good man. He is pictured congratulating the wives of army officers. He seems like a man of the people who is grateful for the work done by his people. The people in the photo love stalin, they are reaching out to shake his hand. Source d is similar making him seem as a man of the people. Both of these were to make people believe in stalin and this belief was built up by communist leaders and by stalin himself, known as the cult of the personality. Stalin wanted people to see him as a god. It was a piece censored by the communists to make people believe in this cult of the personality.
People may also see stalin as an inspirational leader. Source k was a biography of stalin and described him as a "brilliant leader" and "brilliant military commander", it sings his praises as he loved his people and his country.
Foreigners are also divided as to whether stalin was a good or bad person. The British ambassador to Russia in 1935, lord chilston, described stalin as someone who was a very capable politician and knew what to do with his power.
But there is a lot of evidence which show stalin as A bad person. Source a shows stalin as a mass murderer and he is showing off what he has done. Source f describes him as "a devil". Source h describes him as "distrustful". Sources I and j showed stalin as a user of terror and had everything his own way. He was willing to kill people for no reason other than he was insecure. We know this to be true during the purges. Source l says stalin has "a dark and evil nature" and source m tells how stalin was "corrupted" and a "monstrous tyrant".
We are able to believe these sources because they are not censored and written out of Russia and away from the communist regime. Historians and enemies were freely able to say bad things about stalin as they believed.
The reason there is so much dispute about stalin is because throughout history people have shared the oppisite views on stalin. We are unable to find out the true extent of stalins terror as he had much of the history, which reflect badly on his reign, re-written. But we do have a lot of evidence to show all the good work that stalin did for his country. Some people believe that stalins terror was necessary for the interests of the party and of the working masses, as in source g.
