G.C.S.E History Coursework - Stalin
Question 1
From my study of the sources, I have concluded that Source A gives a negative impression of Stalin and his policies and that Source B is in support of Stalin. However Source C could be interpreted in two ways. In one way it could be perceived as Communist propaganda or on the other hand it could be seen as being neutral. However to fully understand these sources you have to know when, where and who compiled the sources. With all these factors accounted for, you will then be able to comprehend the impressions that he sources are trying to portray.
Source A was drawn in the 1930's. It was published in Paris, the capital of the allied country of France. Source A portrays a negative view of Stalin. It enforces the idea that Stalin's policies resulted in mass death to the Russian people. The picture also has another meaning in that Stalin has no regard or respect for human life. Source A is biased. Stalin's paranoia led him to kill innocent people. Another factor why Stalin killed so many people was because there were a lot of states and regions within the Soviet Union. Stalin thought that with so many people in these areas not everyone would have taken him seriously. One of Stalin's tactics was to create a famine in the state of Ukraine. This area was very prosperous and vast in minerals. As a result of the famine, many thousands perished. This tactic which was deployed in Ukraine was to scare other states, it worked and so Stalin got what he wanted.
Source A shows Stalin looking out on "skull pyramids". The skulls represent the dead whom which Stalin had executed because he perceived them to be a threat to his command. The dead were sorted into many different groups. The Jews, Kulaks and the thousands killed during the purges were all represented. Source A's message is that the people of the Soviet Union lived in fear of Stalin. The population were too afraid to speak out against him because they feared that they too like others in the "skull pyramids" would fall to their death at the hands of Stalin.
Source B was drawn in the 1930's. It was an official Soviet painting. Therefore it was biased to the U.S.S.R. It was a propaganda stunt by Stalin. It shows a positive view of him. It shows him with other workers overlooking a newly opened hydro-electric power station. The painting depicts a joyful mood with Stalin and his co-workers seemingly pleased with their construction. The mood also seems relaxed and informal. The picture portrays Stalin as a friendly man that cares about workers and his countrymen even though he is one of the most powerful men in the world.
Source C is a photograph showing Stalin shaking hands with and congratulating army officer's wives. It has always been that the support of the army is vital in any leadership of a nation. By Stalin shaking the hands of the army officer's wives he is gaining their support which in turn gains the support of their husbands. Again as in Source B, Stalin's actions are representative of one who is concerned about his people and cares for their welfare. Some might suggest that Stalin is complimenting the women for their patriotism for their country.
The source does not reveal the nationality or name of the photographer who took the photograph. It does not reveal the date of when the photograph was taken, either. However the photo depicts a positive view of Stalin and was most probably taken by a Russian photographer.
Stalin is trying to gain the support of the army through their wives. The possible reason for this is that when the former leader of Russia, Trotsky, was exiled from the country, the army had no one to lead them or give them any real direction. Trotsky was banished from the U.S.S.R by Stalin because if Stalin had of killed Trotsky the army then would have been on the back of Stalin. This now meant that Stalin could muscle in on the army and also try to improve his position in the U.S.S.R's political arena.
All the sources feature Stalin. However there are mixed feelings and perceptions which all give different views of Stalin. Stalin's policies are scrutinised heavily in Source A. This picture is from France. It represents the Allied point of view. It is trying to justify why Stalin's Communist policies were negative and that they resulted in death. Source B is biased to Stalin. It is his own official Soviet painting and so portrays a positive view of him. Source C is not as clear. The source depends entirely on how one perceives Stalin. Again, this is the "see-saw theory". On one side you may view Stalin as creating a positive atmosphere towards the soldier's wives or on the other hand you may see it as Stalin muscling in on Trotsky's former position and trying to gain control of the U.S.S.R's most indespensible asset, it's army.
Question2
Source D was written by Stalin in 1945. Immediately, we know that the source was biased to him and that he will try to justify something within it. This is very true. Stalin is critiscising past Russian leaders. He writes, "the lack of concern that our past leaders showed towards our people." This is a direct attack against people like Lenin.
Source D starts off by Stalin telling of how he was once banished to Siberia (Northern Russia). The reason for him being exiled was by the Tsar because he thought that Stalin was revolutionary. However Stalin does not admit in the source why he was exiled. Stalin also fails to admit his failed escape from there in 1917. Stalin tells us how that a group of about thirty men went to try to recover timber from a heavily flooded river. When they returned there was one member of the group missing. Stalin then questioned the men about their missing comrade, but they did not seem too bothered to answer him. Finally, one of the men said, "He remained there at the river". Then eventually it was revealed to Stalin that the man had drowned. Then to Stalin's dismay the man hurried off to tend to a horse. Stalin then rebuked the men for showing more compassion for an animal than a human being. One man replied, "Why should we be concerned about men? We can always make another."
Stalin linked this incident in Siberia to the "lack of concern" former Russian leaders had towards to their people. Stalin penned this source just after the cessation of World War 2. Stalin is using his "fear factor" to put across his message. He is attempting to justify that his next in command are devious and Stalin is also trying to portray them as negative. In a way he is trying to turn the Russian people against his fellow comrades. His use of "striking propaganda" at this time would have been received as "Gospel" by the Russian people because they were so afraid of Stalin that they would have believed anything that he would have said.
In all truthfullness Source D is a contradiction in itself. In truth, those under the command of Stalin would probably have had more compassion for the people than he did. People at the time would have probably just of thought that since Stalin had vastly improved Russia's international stance that everything he said was the truth. Stalin created a "saviour" like persona for himself. He took all the credit for what others had done and this is what the people did not know. They thought that Stalin was solely responsible for progress. Infact the truth is that the ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
In all truthfullness Source D is a contradiction in itself. In truth, those under the command of Stalin would probably have had more compassion for the people than he did. People at the time would have probably just of thought that since Stalin had vastly improved Russia's international stance that everything he said was the truth. Stalin created a "saviour" like persona for himself. He took all the credit for what others had done and this is what the people did not know. They thought that Stalin was solely responsible for progress. Infact the truth is that the Russian people were not very interested in Stalin's rule over the country and the only reason why they stood up and took notice was because Stalin's reign of fear and force meant that he could easily enforce his authority. Stalin also became frustrated because he generally lacked the sphere of influence that was needed to be influential on others outside the U.S.S.R and further afield.
Stalin might have been coined as an Isolationist. He did not care for what was happening in the democratic free states of Western Europe. He did not want Alliances or trade links with these countries because he believed that Russia was superior to them. This became evident when he created a "barrier" separating his Communist Russia from neighbouring Europeans. He did this so he would be seen from the outside world as the great and all peaceful leader of the U.S.S.R
Question 3
Stalin had a huge task ahead of him when he took over the reign of Russia. Stalin was to precede the national idol that left an imprint on everybody in Russia, Lenin. However, as soon as Stalin gained a reasonable amount of power he began to dismiss people from his party as he seen as a threat. But in all truth the people whom he expelled were infact the people who helped and supported him the most through the early stages of his leadership. Stalin was not "immersed" in popularity amongst his people but on the other hand he was not despised either.
In Source E we are exposed to a man who is fervently in support of Stalin. From the source we can see that this Russian man perceives Stalin as the "god-like" figure of Russian life. The source was written in 1935. This was a time when Russia was progressing towards being a superpower and soaring out of its third world status. Stalin guided Russia from the depths of depression and poverty to a level that Russia would be perceived as being respectable. The man in the source tells us how when he met Stalin that he was overcome with his strength, charm and greatness. The man feels that Stalin has made an eternal impact on his life, which he will never relinquish. The source states that the man is "privileged"to see Stalin as he is such an "inspired leader".The writer says that in years to come Stalin will be viewed as a God-Like figure by the men of Russia. From what really happened in Russia we can see that Stalin was not the great man as the writer portrayed him as. There is a hint in the source that the man has been brainwashed by Stalin and this is why he sees him as "God".However in stark contrast,Source F is very different to SourceE.
Source F was written in 1936. It was written by Bukharin. He was a former supporter of Stalin when Stalin was challenging Trotsky to become the successor of Lenin. However, Bukharin radically altered his pretension after he was expelled from the Communist party in 1929. This source was written in Paris, the capital of the Allied country France. Bukharin would have had immunity from Stalin here. In the source Bukharin revealed that Stalin had an insecurity. This insecurity is that Stalin knows internally that he is not any greater than anybody else. Bukharin makes a revelation about Stalin which is very personal. He says that if Stalin thinks that anybody is better than him in any way then he will terminate their existence on Earth merely because this person will just remind him that he is not the greatest but actually a tyrant, intent on murderous activities.
Both sources reveal that in a small amount of time attitudes and opinions towards Stalin differed greatly. One possible reason behind this is that Stalin disowned a long-time friend and not because he began to carry out murders and purges. Source E shows us an impressionable man who only sees what Stalin wants him to see. Source F is from a man who was once very close to Stalin but later ousted by Stalin as he was seen as a threat. Source F is the more realistic view of Stalin. The reason why it is the most realistic is because Bukharin wrote it in the safety of Paris. This means that Bukharin could of told the whole truth without fear or retribution of attack by Stalin. The truth actually is that Stalin was a murderer but he was also an inspirational and charismatic leader that led Russia out of the depths of despair to its current superpower status.
Question 4
Sources G and H are both extracts from a speech made by Krushchev, who was addressing the Soviet Communist party in 1956. Krushchev was Stalin's second in command during the former's final stint in leadership in Russia. Krushchev was a Russian himself and you would probably think that he would of taken a biased view towards Stalin but infact he took a very dim view of him and his policies which is very evident in both sources.
Source G is an explanation by Krushchev of how Stalin acted and his policies and ideoligies on varying issues. Krushchev states that by using "terror" and "executions", Stalin believed that this was the only way to enforce Communism throughout Russia. The immediate response one may have towards this speech is that Krushchev is attacking Stalin and his policies, however there is another interpretation that Krushchev did agree with some of Stalin's policies by later explaining in his speech how Stalin perceived his deeds to be in the best interests of his party and his mass plethora of supporters.
It is obvious from Source G that Krushchev is telling us that though Stalin's doings were in the greatest interests of Russia, however in contrast his popularity was receiving too much attention for he himself to contend with coupled with him trying to persuade the people that he was the God-like figure of Russia. The phrase "cult of personality" could be attributed to Stalin as he lavished praise but detested critiscism. Krushchev is implementing the same tactic that Stalin used on Lenin, he is attempting to denounce Stalin of his power and prestige. Krushchev is very aware of the fact that although Stalin is dead he still has his legions of supporters like the Stalinists. Krushchev is being very careful not to anger any of Stalin's supporters. Like Stalin, Krushchev was a strict leader but both were not on the same scale. As his role in being second in command to Stalin, Krushchev knew him extremely well. Krushchev was very aware of Stalin's paranoia and how if Stalin was to be victorious and successful he needed every Russian to heap praise upon him. Overall, when we analyse Source G we realise that Krushchev is giving a frank and honest view in his analysis and interpretation of Stalin and how he reveals that Stalin's most important aim was to keep Communism thriving in Russia and the most important of all, to protect himself.
Krushchev's proof that Stalin was paranoid can be seen in source H. Krushchev portrays a more negative view of Stalin and says how Stalin acted "suspicious" and how he was very "distrustful". This is proof that Stalin was paranoid. As Stalin and Krushchev were very close, Krushchev probably felt he was safe from Stalin, however this may not have been the case as many times before, due to Stalin's paranoia he suspected people below him of trying to gain power, eventhough it may not have been true. Stalin's tactic was to issue the suspect with an ultimatum saying that he would kill them at a "show trial" under the offence of treason. If the suspect admitted guilty to treason then he alone would be killed but if he admitted not guilty then himself and all his known relatives would be killed. The same tactic used at show trials was also used to kill Nikolai Bukharin. Bukharin assisted Stalin in his rise to power but Stalin soon realised that the public had more support for Bukharin than himself so he decided to kill him. In source H, Krushchev picks out a prime example why Stalin was so fuelled with paranoia. A question like, "Why are your eyes so shifty today?" would have been put forward to an innocent civilian. If Stalin did not like their response he then would have killed them. This is a prime example of how the twisted mind of Josef Stalin mechanized. It is also very relevant in realising how easy an innocent member of the public could be easily added to the 30 million dead that already existed. It proves that if Stalin was this much suspicious towards innocent people of everyday life then how suspicious would he have been towards his own fellow party members, it beggars to believe.
In this source Krushchev continues to inform us of how Stalin showed utter contempt and distrust towards his fellow party members. Trotsky, Bukharin, Zinoniev and Rykov were all examples of people in the Communist Party whom Stalin suspected of being plotting to take over him or were simply just more popular than he was.
Using the information we currently possess on Stalin, it is very evident that Krushchev's analysis and interpretation of the mind of Stalin was very accurate. Krushchev's speech was administered three years after the death of Stalin, however he still had to be very cautious in how he conveyed his message towards his party members.
Krushchev's method of revealing the good and the bad sides of Stalin's tactics was very intuitive. Krushchev referred to Stalin's methods as great but extremely harsh. Krushchev is very adamant to note that Stalin brought Russia from the depths of despair to become one of the biggest superpowers in the world. Krushchev also realises that Stalin has many supporters who are hardline and patriotic.
The De-Stalinisation of Russia was the main objective set out by Krushchev if he was going to succeed on the same level as Lenin and Stalin. Krushchev believed that if Russia was going to precede its current economic status then it would have to gain links with the west. This was something that Stalin never managed to do. Stalin thought that Russia was of strong enough pedigree to provide for itself of its own resources. Some historians stated thatKkrushchev wanted to down Stalin and his policies, so that he himself could be given an eternal reputation. Krushchev felt that the more he was unlike Stalin, the more successful he would be. Krushchev wanted to show the Russian public that he did not participate in the purges and random killings and that he was not one of the contributing factors of Stalin's failures at the end of his "reign of terror".
Question 5
Stalin's control over the people of Russia in the time between 1923 and 1934 was fairly lenient. When Stalin was elected to power he portrayed an amicable feeling towards his population. However this was not to be the case as once Stalin got enough control over Russia, he began to introduce his evil deeds and started his purges, which victimised sections of the community, which ended up in the majority of them being killed.
Stalin's victimisation was mainly concentrated on the Jews, however he also detested religious orders and Nationalists. Stalin thought that Communism should be the only system allowed to prevail in the modern world. That is why he was not a believer in religion, as he seen Communism as the only way forward. Stalin also picked on the minority sections of society. He lambasted the rich for having no respect for him or Communism. The Communist ideology stated that all sections of society should have the same living standards. Nationalists were one of his greatest adversaries as they were patriotic to their country. This was not like Communism as the Nationalists had a policy of national independence. During the 1930's, Stalin had 95% of his army officers killed as well as 90% of his army generals. He did this because he felt that he would gain more respect and authority for himself. Stalin had blundered this time as by the time the war came about there was nobody left to guide the army. Due to his acute paranoia, Stalin suspected that others were plotting behind his back, so he either killed them or he would pack them off to labour camps in Siberia were they would work tirelessly but never get paid and would only get little food. Those who were banished to the labour camps were rarely seen alive again by their families. Stalin believed that by sending people to labour camps he was gaining vast cheap labour. During Stalin's time in power he sent between 7 and 8 million to labour camps.
During the 1930's Stalin gathered up all those in his country who he perceived to be threats to his command. The majority of these people were his own fellow members in office. The people that were assigned to the "show trials" were the men who were personally close to Stalin and who assisted him in his rise to power. Stalin told the public that those who were put on trial were guilty of the crime of treason and this resulted in the death penalty. Stalin used his own police force, the NKVB, to gather those who were up for trial. The most famous "show trial" was that of Bukharin.
Sources I and J are very truthful. They both show that Stalin gave ultimatums to those who were staring in the eyes of death. These were to plead guilty and have yourself killed or to plead not guilty and have your whole family killed along with yourself. This is the thinking behind why every person put on trial pleaded guilty every time. The Russian public then perceived these people to be traitors. Using terror and sociology Stalin was achieving his aims. In Source J, Stalin is drawn as judge, jury and executioner in the courtroom. This proved that no matter there plea, they would still be presented guilty and then murdered. In an interpretation of Source I you would be led to believe that Stalin held a gun to the rear of the men on trials heads.
Another methodology that Stalin incorporated into his reign was that by showing the public he could condemn his own friends to death he would not be afraid to do the same to them. As many of these men had pledged their lives to Russia, the putting on "show trials' only humiliated them further. They had pledged their lives to Communism and Stalin but in return they were killed instead of being praised.
The reason those put on "show trial" were mindful of pleading guilty in order to protect their family, was that in 1934 Stalin issued a new law that stated that those who were put on trial were "encouraged" to plead guilty. Stalin said that those who had committed crimes towards Russia and pleaded not guilty would be killed and that afterwards their families may be killed aswell. Stalin said that if a man pleaded guilty then his family might be saved from being slaughtered.
Question 6
Sources L and M are both biographical sources of Stalin which were constructed many years after he passed away. Source L was wrote in 1983 by an English historian. The source starts with praise directed towards Stalin in the form of him being described as a," very skilled, indeed gifted politician." This is very true in that Stalin came from behind in the power race for Russia by using his great manipulative ability. Stalin's 25 years in power is evidence that he was a persistent and durable leader. During his time Stalin achieved many of his aims. He began to modernise Russia and built it up into its superpower status. Stalin's long term aim was to leave a lasting imprint on the future of Russian ideology with Communism but this failed because of Krushchev's gradual De-Stalinisation of Russia.
Stalin's good and bad sides are both portrayed in Source L, which makes it very useful to refer to. As Source L says, Stalin achieved great things in his 25 year reign: we now see how, in any country, advancement comes at a cost. In Stalin's tenure as leader this cost was very great. However Source L is not totally commendatory to Stalin. It also tells us of how Stalin was a harsh man with a "dark and evil" personality. From our own knowledge we can agree with this because we know that he murdered 30 million civilians.
Anti-Stalin themes are clearly prevalent in Source M. The two phrases that attack Stalin are, "monstrous tyrant" and "corrupted by absolute power." It is very obvious from the source that the British historian is saying that Stalin was a very harsh and callous man. The historian tells us of how the effects were disastrous when Stalin's ego clashed with his power. Stalin used fear and manipulation to make people work for him and support him. Stalin's extreme paranoia determined his character. Stalin had a belief that everyone was plotting against him and denouncing Communism. However, this was most untrue. Stalin's paranoia transformed him from being a ruthless killer to a "monstrous tyrant" and this is fervently evident in that he carried out the purges and the show trials. The writer of the source perceives that if Stalin did not have these means of control then he would have had no supporters and no one would have paid much attention to him.
From analysis of sources A to M it is very clear that there is differing feelings towards whether Stalin was a man or monster. Most of the people under his subjugation saw him as a charismatic leader who rose Russia out of the depths of Depression using his masterful 5 year plans. Whilst those who knew him on a more personal level saw him as an infirm killer. It is very difficult to derive whether Stalin really was a beast but one factor was clearly evident was that he was an apprehensive and mistrustful paranoid.
Question 7
Trying to determine whether Stalin was indeed a man or a monster is very difficult to judge. In order to try to come to a conclusion we have to analyse the facts what made him was he was. Stalin was an un-compassionate, paranoid mass killer but on the other hand he was able to raise Russia to superpower status and overcome depression in a very short space of time. Anyone person who could have done this must have been a very gifted leader of a country.
The judging of whether Stalin was a man or monster is a question which has plagued many historians for many years. Stalin achieved power in 1923 but his tenure came to an end when he died in 1953. The inquisition we have to project to ourselves is one of why if Stalin was such a monster then why did he remain in power for such a long time. To help us gain an answer we have to examine Sources A to M.
In Source A we see a French view of Stalin's deeds. We instantaneously get the impression that this source is Anti-Stalinist. Each of the three pyramids are there to represent the different sections of Russian society which Stalin segregated and victimised. The three pyramids were represented by the Kulaks, Jews and the middle-class sections of Russia. There is a tainted smirk lined across the face of Stalin which indicates that he had no penitence for the crimes he committed. He regarded his actions as in the best needs of Communism and Russia as a country. This source portrays Stalin as a baneful man.
Source B is yet another picture of Stalin. One might say that the picture had been systematized to portray Stalin's behaviour towards his contemporaries. The image being given out here is of a positive nature and so shows a good side towards Stalin. Source C is also in favor of Stalin as it shows him shaking the hands of army wives officers. He is doing this as he wants to gain the support of the army which is vital in any leadership. It also shows that Stalin wanted to be liked in every part of Russia.
Source D is a passage which was constructed in 1945. In this passage he is striving to get the people of Russia to reject the "threats" for his post as head of Russia. As Stalin wrote this we can immediately see that it is misleading. In his story, he is trying to project the conception that he has arrived to emancipate the people of Russia from its former state. At the time of him writing this source this may have been very viable. However this source should be taken with a pinch of salt as it is conpricious and so cannot be taken very earnestly.
Source E voices for itself in provisions of acceptance within Russia. The writer characterizes Stalin as a God-like man and how he is such as a martyr and a man of distinguished valor. The reason the author has written this is because he spent every day living in consternation that perchance that very day would be his last should Stalin perceive there to be anything dubious about his persona. The idea was that if you were a pro-Stalinist then you would be rewarded in many lives to come. The source is a dogmatic one which shows a positive view towards Stalin.
In Source F we are led to show how unanticipated Stalin is. This is evident in the case of Bukharin, who was disowned and murdered by Stalin. In truth, Stalin had much to owe towards Bukharin, as the former led Stalin to the majority of his successes. This source hammers home the message of how callous Stalin was in killing his best friend because he feared that he was more popular than he was.
Both Sources G and H are written by Stalin's predecessor, Nikolai Krushchev. They were also both written after Stalin had died. Both these sources are trusty and reveal that although Stalin was a very barbaric man he was still a very skilled and successful leader of Russia. The source more or less says that though Stalin worked tirelessly for the rise of his country, the value of human life was succumb to this and so had to give way. Krushchev also reveals that he was aware of Stalin's paranoia. The thing that makes this source trustworthy is that Kruschev was second in command to Stalin for many's a year.
Just like sources G and H were very comparible so are sources I and J which share similar a topic. Sources I and J deal with Stalin's purges in the 1930's. It shows members of Stalin party:openly admitting to a crime they did not commit. The two sources are a true reflection of Stalin and prove he was a murderer of civilians. Source J shows Stalin as judge, jury and executioner. Both sources symbolize that Stalin had no regard for his population and because of his acute paranoia, did not become the expert ruler he told everyone he was going to be.
Sources K,L and M are three biographical sources which were published in England and in the Soviet Union at different times. Two of these were published after his death. Source K was written in 1947 whilst Stalin was still alive. The Russian biographer told us how in every way of life Stalin was a great leader and was perceived to be a saviour of Russian society. Its un-reliability shines through though because it is radically one-sided. Stalin's failures and successes are given a more balanced view in Source L. It was published in Britain in 1988. Again as like Source K, Source M is a totally biased "slanging" upon the policies used by Stalin to achieve his objectives. This source was written in 1974 by a British man. It is totally one sided and so is very dubious.
Question 8
Stalin was a man with excellent results but not one with super formulas. Stalin's best result was helping Russia climb to the top of the ladder in world superpower. Some historians may argue that at one time Russia was on the same level as U.S.A in terms of superpower status. Due to Stalin's Five Year Plans, the Soviet Union had more or less doubled its industrial output in little less than 10 years.
Stalin's first Five Year Plan mainly concentrated on the aspect of heavy industry. This was the coal and steel production in the Ural area and the railways and machinery which were dispersed throughout the country. The results of this initiative was that employment increased two fold and the output of these businesses increased dramatically. Just as the Second Five Year plan was about to come to fruition the fear of war became widespread. This meant that the creation of weapons for the army was the main constituent of the industries products.
With the success which was brought about by the Five Year Plans the population of Russia began to admire Stalin. But the economic soar had to come at the cost of human prestige. The workers of Russian businesses worked immensly long hours to keep up with the ever lasting demands which were struck upon them by the urgency and insistence of Stalin. As a result many perished because of the poor conditions that they had to endure. If you were still alive and could not keep up with the demands of Stalin you were either killed or exiled. If you even spoke out against Stalin you were lambasted and then sent to labor camps to work for nothing to probably never live on to tell the tale.
In analysis, the 30 million people who perished at the hands of Stalin were segregated into two groups. Those who opposed Stalin or those who Stalin thought opposed him. Stalin's enemies were the minorities, opposition to him and the Nationalists. Stalin believed that if you yourself believed in freedom then that would warrant death on your part. In turn this stopped people from thinking which led to brainwashing.
In places which Stalin had not yet gained full authority e.g Ukraine and Georgia, he created major disasters there like food shortages and famines. He felt that people in these areas did not take him seriously and so he had to punish them. The extreme irony which can be derived from this act of folly is that the vast majority of people in these parts were in support of Stalin. It was his extreme paranoia which led him to carry out this act.
By means of the two attitudes we have discussed on Stalin it is fervently evident that there are extreme flaws in making a decision about whether Stalin's methods of running Russia were successful or not. There is little doubt to whether he was a great leader o not but you have to take into account that he was a masquerading malicious rogue who ruled by oppression of human activity and needless killings of human innocents in vast totality.
