• 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
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18

Stalin: man or monster Sources Questions

Extracts from this document...


Stalin: man or monster 1. 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. ...read more.


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. ...read more.


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. ...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 ...

    make good the difference in 10 years or they crush us'. Stalin gained power over the workers, due to the Industrialisation scheme. The sate gave a specific amount to the factory managers of how much goods were to be produced.

  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. How did Stalin control Russia from 1924-1953?

    This was the purpose of his economic policies. Stalin wanted results and he wanted them quickly. He began a Command Economy, which meant he was the one controlling all the production made in the country. He decided how much coal, steel, iron, oil, and electricity was produced, and gave strict deadlines.

  2. Russia 1905-1917 exam questions with mark schemes.

    And another reason was that the Tsar appointed Stolypin as the prime minister to stay in power. Stolypin appointed him because he used the carrot and stick method. The carrot system meant to do some good things. For example, he improved the education in Russia; he made it easier for the peasants to buy lands and also cleared their debts.

  1. Stalin and the Five Year Plans

    Many workers died whilst building industrial plants, mines or other buildings wanted by the government. Although when they were built they were successful, hundreds, probably thousands of workers died during the construction periods. In conclusion, it has to be said that there were probably more things that brought miserly to the Russian people than there were to bring them comfort.

  2. How Successful Were Stalin's Policies During His Leadership of the Soviet Union?

    Moreover Soviet production in other areas such as coal, steel, tractors, oil and sugar all rose dramatically. Urban unemployment virtually disappeared as millions of peasants migrated into towns seeking employment. Opportunities also opened for upward social mobility into the new intelligentsia and emerging elite due to Russia finding itself short of skilled technicians, industrials managers and supervisory personnel.

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

    of the farmers' crops, and leave 10 % for the family to eat and sell what was left. Stalin used the profit from the harvests, to fund his 5 Year Plans. The speed at which he wanted to industrialize the USSR was extremely costly and he needed that income to help fund it.

  2. Assess the Impact Stalin Had On Russia and Its People Stalin came to ...

    Slacking off and absenteeism were very rare and this helped for the production figures of the factories to greatly increase. Stalin played a major role in transforming Russia from a backwards peasant oriented country into a world super power. Stalin used the purges as an opportunity to acquire a source

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