Compare and contrast Hitler's and Stalin's roads to power.

Secondly, similarities concerning opposition's ineffectiveness will be discussed. Opposition

was divided and weak – left wing and right wing of the political scenes quarrelled with each other in both Germany and the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics (Zinoviev, Kamenev and Trotsky vs Bukharin) and were not prepared to compromise and left beyond personal intrigues. What is more, left wing was divided itself – Zinoviev with Kamenev argued with Trotsky and KPD considered SPD as its main enemy. Besides in the Weimar Republic workers were weakened by unemployment and could not afford to strike against the Nazis. Moreover, there were almost no supporters of democracy and liberalism thanks to long authoritarian tradition. It might also be mentioned that in both countries Hitler and Stalin were underestimated. Austrian corporal was expected to be a puppet in the hands of the Right who would not last long, especially that there were only three Nazis in the government. Nobody remembered that he managed to bring party members together after the failure of the Münich Putsch and breaking the law in the Night of the Long Knives did not open the eyes of ordinary Germans. In the same way, 'Tovarishch Kartotekov' was considered as 'the grey blur', mediocre intellectual who is not able to win the contest for power.

Nobody even noticed that the post of General Secretary gives Stalin enormous power. It is also

worth mentioning that opposition did not resist Hitler's 'legal revolution' or Stalin's abuse of law of  action.

Thirdly, differences in roads to power will be discussed. At the beginning, Hitler tried to

seize power in putsch, but his coup failed, suppressed by the armed police and Bavarian soldiers.

Stalin did not even have to try this way of taking power, as he was already a member of the ruling party. Next point is that Hitler used 'Gleichschaltung' – a policy of ensuring control over all German classes by establishing different 'voluntary' organisations, like German Labour Front (DAF), the Hitler Youth, the German Lawyers' Front, etc. It was different from the situation in the USSR, where the Communist party did not have specially derived branches inside the country. As mentioned earlier, Hitler – as a Chancellor of the Weimar Republic - did not have strong position in the government at the beginning. He had to persuade Hindenburg – reluctant to Austrian corporal - to issue emergency decrees which suspended people's freedom ('Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of the Nation and the State') and later, to give Hitler power to rule by decrees (Enabling Act: 'Law for Terminating the Suffering of the People and the Nation'). That is why Hitler was able to issue 'Law against the Formation of New Parties' which outlawed other parties and made Germany single-party state. On the other hand, Stalin had very strong position in comparison to his counterpart in Germany because he had been the Party Secretary and member of two important party organisations: Orgburo and the Secretariat.

To sum up, both autocrats had the same aim – creating an image of themselves - using

propaganda machine. Similarly, these tyrants appealed to the complaints and needs of majorities. In addition, Hitler had total control over his party, likewise Stalin. What is more, both despots made concessions and alliances. These dictators were respected, especially that they used terror and intimidation. Furthermore, they faced divided, weak and not having power to pose real threat

opposition. Above all, their opponents – Kamenev, Zinoviev, Trotsky, Papen and others -

underestimated these future tyrants and respected legal actions although they led to gaining power by Stalin or Hitler. However, on the contrary to Stalin, Hitler two times tried to gain power in the Weimar Republic and made people join a huge range of different organisations for everybody. Equally important is the fact that Hitler did not have strong position in the government and he had to act very carefully in order to become all-powerful leader of Germany. Taking everything into account, Hitler's and Stalin's roads to power are quite analogous and differences between these routes are caused by circumstances in which these two found themselves.