Franklin D. Roosevelt even had opponents from within his own party. His main opponent in the Democratic Party was Senator Huey Long of Louisiana. Alden P Hatch tells us:
“Long was a shameless politician who played on people’s prejudices. He was a creature without morals or honour. He was building a political empire in the South by methods, which even the most ruthless politicians would think twice about. He appealed to the wild, unthinking fringe and was just the type to make himself a dictator if he could. He was making alarming progress, even among the sanest members of the Left. Some of his programme was sensible and Roosevelt decided to adopt those portions of it. As Franklin put it: ‘Maybe we’d better try to steal some of Huey’s thunder’”
Huey Long was born, the son of a poor farmer, whocould not afford to send him to colleges so Huey taught himself. Huey won a place at law school, gaining a degree after just 8 months. He was elected to the post of Louisiana Railroad Commissioner. Long saw himself as leader of the poor whites of the Deep South and spoke out against the power of big business. He was elected Governor of Louisiana and began a program of state spending on schools, roads and available posts in the state government. Long used bribery and blackmail to get the votes of workers in
state-run industries. If workers wanted to keep their jobs, they had to ‘deliver the vote’ of their families and friends as well. Long’s agents counted the votes sometimes there were more votes for his supporters than there were people registered to
vote! Opponents were sometimes kidnapped on Long’s orders. Long was elected to the US Senate. He promised that if he became President he would bring in food
subsidies and confiscate all private fortunes over $3 million giving $5000 of the money to every family in America. Nevertheless, he did not explain how this was to be achieved.
Huey Long did not live long enough to become a serious danger to either Roosevelt or The American system of Government. On 8 September 1935, a young doctor shot him in the stomach in the Louisiana state capitol building in Baton Rouge. He died the following day in Hospital.
The next year was presidential election year. Alden P Hatch tells us about the 1936 election:
“The campaign was really dirty. The Republicans flung around phrases such as ‘dictatorship’, ‘socialism’, ‘Constitution in danger’ and ‘dangerously ambitious’. In the whispering campaign they did not forget the old lies about the President’s health and the well-worn story that his mind was affected.”
Despite these desperate complaints about Franklin D. Roosevelt, he won a landslide victory, winning every state except for Maine and Vermont.
Roosevelt had opposition in the Supreme Court as well. In 1937 the President tried to ‘fix’ the Supreme Court. The nine judges in the Court were mainly old and conservative and in 1935 the Court had declared the Agricultural Adjustment Act and the National Industrial Recovery Act ‘unconstitutional’. The Court had said about the National Recovery Administration:
“It is not the job of the Court to look at the advantages or disadvantages of such a system. It is enough to say that the Constitution does not provide for it. We are of the opinion that such an attempt to fix the hours and wages of workers was not a lawful use of government power.”
Franklin D. Roosevelt believed the Supreme Court judges had made these decisions simply because they did not like the laws and not because the laws went against the Constitution. The President tried to get Congress to agree to allow him to appoint up to six new judges of his choice. Because of this, many Americans felt that Roosevelt was now trying to tamper with the Constitution to give himself more power, and he lost a lot of popular support. Congress refused to agree to the President’s demands. The Supreme Court judges seemed to have taken heed of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s complaint, as from then on they were much more cautious about declaring Roosevelt’s New Deal laws ‘unconstitutional’. All this opposition must have been very daunting for Roosevelt and some of his opposition may have caused him to back down (see below) and plunge America into a new depression.
From all of the evidence that is presented above, we can see that although Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ did create many new jobs, it did not stimulate the economy enough to return American life to that of ‘The Roaring Twenties’. Roosevelt’s popularity was not improved with the slump of August 1937. Within a year, unemployment had risen by 2.5 million. The President himself was at least partly to blame for the slump. In April 1938, Roosevelt started a new spending program but a year later there were still over ten million people unemployed.
Roosevelt got some of his New Deal ideas from the British economist John Maynard Keynes. Keynes was a very astute economist as he practically predicted the depression when he was complaining about German Reparations after the First World War. Keynes believed that government action was the key to ending the depression. His policies included:
∙ Western governments should increase their spending on public works such as roads, railways and building programmes;
∙ This extra spending would create millions of new jobs;
∙ The new workers would have more money to spend on goods such as clothing, radios, refrigerators etc;
∙ The industries producing these goods would need to take on more workers who, in turn, would have more spending power;
∙ This would lead to yet more industries expanding and taking on more workers;
∙ All the new workers would be paying more taxes, so in the end the government would get most of its money back.
Keynes believed that government spending could reverse the ‘downward spiral’ and so between 1933 and 1937, Franklin D. Roosevelt based his policies on Keynesian economics. However, Roosevelt did not believe that a government could go on spending more than it got back in taxes for long. He said that one day the government would have to ‘balance the books’. In 1937, the US Government debt reached $4 billion. Keynes frantically urged the President to increase government spending still further. Roosevelt’s ‘ common sense’ caused him to slash public spending, which putting the US economy back on the downward spiral until the outbreak of World War Two.
Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ policies were inconsistent and he was constantly changing his mind. Nig businesses, despite his numerous attacks, proved to be very powerful and were constantly undermining his ‘New Deal’. Despite the billions of dollars that Franklin D. Roosevelt had pumped into the economy, confidence was low and in 1937, Americans were only investing and spending 75% of what they had in 1929. As well as unemployment remaining rife throughout Roosevelt’s term, he did little for America’s poorest. These included migrant workers, unskilled workers and farm labourers. Roosevelt did very little help the black communities and encouraged farmers to take land out of production (as a result of the AAA), which made 200,000backs unemployed. The wage code also allowed employers to pay black employees less than their white counterparts. House clearance schemes often meant simply clearing out the blacks.
The ‘New Deal’ did stop the depression fro getting worse but Roosevelt did not ‘go the full way’ as he reduced Government spending in August 1937 (see above). He did help farms and homeowners to stay in their property with Government aid and he introduced social security to many Americans. The ‘New Deal’ built many roads, schools and dams for when America restored it’s former wealth and the TVA revolutionised relationships between local and central governments. Most of all though, the ‘New Deal’ gave Americans hope and confidence at their worst period in history and ‘saved’ American democracy. It is this that I feel made the ‘New Deal’ a success, if a limited one.
Compare What Sources L And M Say About Stalin
Both of these sources contain many similarities and many differences.
Source L acknowledges that Stalin was not without flaws. The author of source L claims that Stalin had ‘a dark and evil side’ to his nature. Like source M, this source was published in Britain after the death of Stalin.
Source L describes Stalin as a ‘ruthless politician’ who then became ‘a monstrous tyrant’ after being ‘corrupted by absolute power’. Like source L, source M comments, but it differs in that it focuses entirely on Stalin’s ‘evil side’ and does not give a balanced account.
Source M also implies that Stalin achieved nothing in his life and during his time, as leader of Russia as the author says ‘the explanation of his life…’.
Source L is a balanced account because it describes the flaws of Stalin and also his strengths. Source L claims that Stalin was a ‘gifted politician’ and the author even goes so far as to say that Stalin was ‘one of the greatest political figures of the twentieth century’. The author is obviously full of praise for Stalin’s achievements.
Although both sources are opinions, Source M is very one sided as it denounces Stalin – makes him look bad. We know that source L is subjective because the author begins with ‘it is my belief that….’. Like Source M, source L was taken from a biography of Stalin and so they may not have had full access to reliable sources. The sources were also written nine years apart.
Whilst source L refers to Stalin as having an ‘evil side’, source M claims that Stalin was simply ‘corrupted by absolute power’ into ‘a murderous tyrant’. Source M also mentions ‘the terror’ whereas source L is not specific as it only refers to Stalin’s ‘dark and evil side’.
Source M justifies why Stalin did what he did ‘the terror was necessary, not only to keep men obedient, but even to make them believe in him’. This is not the case with source L because it simply says that Stalin was a ‘gifted politician’ and says nothing about why Stalin ordered the purges.
Both sources contain valuable content, which we can use to understand Stalin but both sources say many things about Stalin, some of which differ, and some of which agree with the other source. The authors share different views on Stalin’s life, policies and attitudes towards Stalin and so portray different images of Stalin that also contain many similarities.
Compare What Sources L And M Say About Stalin
Both of these sources contain many similarities and many differences.
Source L acknowledges that Stalin was not without flaws. The author of source L claims that Stalin had ‘a dark and evil side’ to his nature. Like source M, this source was published in Britain after the death of Stalin.
Source L describes Stalin as a ‘ruthless politician’ who then became ‘a monstrous tyrant’ after being ‘corrupted by absolute power’. Like source L, source M comments, but it differs in that it focuses entirely on Stalin’s ‘evil side’ and does not give a balanced account.
Source M also implies that Stalin achieved nothing in his life and during his time, as leader of Russia as the author says ‘the explanation of his life…’.
Source L is a balanced account because it describes the flaws of Stalin and also his strengths. Source L claims that Stalin was a ‘gifted politician’ and the author even goes so far as to say that Stalin was ‘one of the greatest political figures of the twentieth century’. The author is obviously full of praise for Stalin’s achievements.
Although both sources are opinions, Source M is very one sided as it denounces Stalin – makes him look bad. We know that source L is subjective because the author begins with ‘it is my belief that….’. Like Source M, source L was taken from a biography of Stalin and so they may not have had full access to reliable sources. The sources were also written nine years apart.
Whilst source L refers to Stalin as having an ‘evil side’, source M claims that Stalin was simply ‘corrupted by absolute power’ into ‘a murderous tyrant’. Source M also mentions ‘the terror’ whereas source L is not specific as it only refers to Stalin’s ‘dark and evil side’.
Source M justifies why Stalin did what he did ‘the terror was necessary, not only to keep men obedient, but even to make them believe in him’. This is not the case with source L because it simply says that Stalin was a ‘gifted politician’ and says nothing about why Stalin ordered the purges.
Both sources contain valuable content, which we can use to understand Stalin but both sources say many things about Stalin, some of which differ, and some of which agree with the other source. The authors share different views on Stalin’s life, policies and attitudes towards Stalin and so portray different images of Stalin that also contain many similarities.
Using the Sources in this paper and your knowledge of Stalin explain whether or not you think he was a monster
Over the years since Stalin’s death, historians have debated endlessly about whether Stalin was a monster or whether he was simply a ruthless politician. I intend to present a balanced argument for and against Stalin being a monster, using the thirteen sources that I have been given as well as my own knowledge.
Source A is a cartoon, which shows the results Stalin’s purges (such as the ‘dekulakisation’ programme that he introduced). The cartoon was published in Paris in the 1930’s. This raises questions about its reliability as the cartoonist is portraying communism from the perspective of a capitalist country. Source A depicts Stalin in a negative light as the caption, when translated, reads, ‘Visit the pyramids of the U.S.S.R.’. The cartoon also shows piles of skulls that have been shaped into pyramids. Perched on top of the piles of skulls are several black Ravens. This could refer to the fact that during the purges, members of the N.K.B.D., nicknamed ‘The Black Ravens’ because they tended to operate under the cover of darkness, arrested many victims. The circling ravens perhaps indicate that the N.K.B.D. had complete control over the people. On 12th December 1938 Stalin signed the death sentence of 3182 innocent people and then went to watch a film in the evening and these pyramids are the results of these, as well as other, acts of Stalin. Stalin is gesturing towards the pyramids as if he was proud of his achievements. This source tells us that Stalin killed a great number of people and showed no remorse for doing so. This source depicts Stalin as a monster rather than a man.
Source B is a painting, which depicts Stalin mingling with workers, insinuating that he is a man of the people. It is an official Soviet painting, showing that it conforms to the ‘Socialist Realism’ Policy that Stalin introduced to ensure that all pictures, songs and pieces of writing corresponded with Stalin’s views and policies and did not portray them in a negative light. Source B shows Stalin as a sociable and popular character. In the background is a dam, similar to the Dneiper dam, which meant that Russia had the largest Hydro-Electric Power station in Europe. In reality, these projects were often using forced labour, usually inmates in a gulag. In the painting, the workers are happy and are talking to Stalin. This painting has undergone the ‘Socialist Realism’ policy and so could not possibly show Stalin in a negative light, as the creator would, most likely, have been punished. This painting was created during the 1930’s when the first five-year plans were in place. The aim of these plans was to modernise Russia from a backward peasant society into a modern industrial state, which was able to withstand the threat of any future foreign invasion. One of the targets that Stalin set was for the amount of electricity produced to increase to 22 million kilowatts. The dam is shown in the painting was regarded as essential to achieve this goal. This source shows Stalin as being a man and not a monster.
Source C shows a photograph of Stalin shaking hands with the wives of army officers. This is quite an ironic photograph as the wives of many army officers are congratulating Stalin and yet he purged 3/5 Marshals and 50,000 troops were sent to the gulags. Source C is a photograph showing Stalin as popular because there are many outstretched hands, which are trying to shake hands with Stalin. Everybody has a smile on their face and the general mood is a cheerful one. This photograph is unlikely to be a true reflection of public opinion as the army suffered heavily as a result of Stalin’s purges and Stalin often staged or edited photographs. An example of Stalin editing photographs is when he removed his political rivals from the history of the revolution. In one photograph, Lenin is making a speech with Trotsky and Kamenev in the foreground, whereas in the second photograph, both Trotsky and Kamenev have been removed. In this photograph, Stalin is portrayed as a man and not as a monster.
Source D is an anecdote, which was written by Stalin in 1945. Stalin is recalling an incident that occurred thirty years before, between 1900 and before the Bolshevik revolution, when he was exiled in Siberia. This was written at a time when the Russians were drawing to a close the Second World War and the cold war was beginning to set in. This was not a war as such but a period of hostile relations between the Capitalist Western countries and the communist Russians.
The source portrays the people beneath Stalin as not caring about the people. We know this because the source says, ‘Why should we be concerned about men? We can always make another man’. This could be to blame them for the problems of Russia and make them scapegoats. Stalin might also want to use this source to say to the Capitalist nations of the world that any stories that they may have heard about Russia were not his fault, but the people beneath him. This could be to portray a positive image of communism at the start if the cold war and so gain support with countries occupied by the Red Army, after pushing back the Germans to Germany. It could also be a ‘reason’ as to why he purged members of the communist party. It may be to counteract the atrocities that the Red Army performed, especially to the German population during and after the Second World War.
Although this source is partly reliable as Stalin was indeed exiled to Siberia, we know that Stalin was not so compassionate to his people because he purged between eight and fourteen million Russians so there is an element of hypocrisy as Stalin portrayed one image but was in fact a very different person. Stalin often lied to the Russian public, such as in the show trials of Kamenev, Zinoviev and numerous other members of the communist party where he claimed that they had committed many acts against the State when in truth this is extremely unlikely. This means that Stalin may have written this source simply to make himself seem like a caring and compassionate man when he in fact ordered many Russians to their deaths.
Source E was written about Stalin by a writer who used it in a speech to the congress of Soviets in 1935. The speech was published in the official newspaper of the communist party, Pravda (which ironically translates as truth as it was censored by the ‘socialist realism’ policy). This source tells us that Stalin was very popular and that meeting him was seen as a great honour, it also tells us that he would be regarded in history as a great man.
The creator of source E is speaking to the congress of Soviets in 1935 and so, in order to not become a victim of the purges, he would only compliment Stalin and would not say anything that Stalin might find offensive. The author’s speech would have to conform to the ‘socialist realism’ policy, which censored all music lyrics, journalistic pieces, books and paintings to ensure that nothing offensive about Stalin was written. The fact that it was published in the official paper of the communist party, ‘Pravda’ means that it is likely that the source is simply another piece of Soviet propaganda, designed to convince the Russian people that Stalin was to be looked upon as a god. The author exaggerates several times in the source, ‘Thy name is engraved on every factory, every machine, every place on earth, and in the hearts of all men’. ‘I am so well and joyful’ could be untruthful as a great many Russian lived in fear of their lives and living conditions were poor. This is a subjective source and so cannot be believed fully. Source E, although it claims that Stalin was a man, if it is examined in depth, we can discover that there are many sinister truths to it and so it actually depicts Stalin as a monster.
Bukharin, who supported Stalin against Trotsy as Lenin’s successor, spoke in Paris in 1936. Source F is an extract from this speech. This source tells us that Stalin was paranoid and that he tries to make himself believe that he is the greatest man who ever lived. It also claims that he is a ‘devil’ which is in stark contrast to source E.
Source F was created from a speech in Paris in 1936. At this time, Paris was a democratic country and so allowed freedom of speech. This means that the speech that Bukharin gave would not have been censored. He also refers to the assassination of Kirov as he says, ‘If anyone speaks better than he does, that man is for it! Stalin will not let him live’. Kirov was a rival of Stalin and Stalin’s N.K.B.D. trained Nikolayev to shoot him. Stalin organised Kirov’s murder and then covered his tracks and Kirov’s bodyguard was clubbed to death. The assassination of Kirov gave Stalin an excuse to issue a decree sanctioning the death penalty for acts of terror. Bukharin himself has had first hand experience of Stalin and Stalin’s personality and has not had to rely on secondary information. The fact that Bukharin was purged also suggests that Stalin was indeed paranoid, as he could have purged Bukharin for speaking negatively of him, proving Bukharin’s point that Stalin disapproved of anybody who did not speak highly of Stalin.
In general, Bukharin is saying that Stalin’s propaganda machine convinces everyone, including Stalin himself that he is a great man who is worthy of a god-like status. Stalin’s insecurity is highlighted by historical facts; such as he purged 3/5 Marshals and 50,000 troops, even though this weakened the army as it contained inexperienced commanders who had simply won favour with Stalin. Stalin also purged eight to fourteen million people, most of whom were innocent of the ‘crimes’ that they were accused of. This source claims that Stalin was a monster and not a man.
Source G was taken from a speech by Khrushchev, the leader of Russia after Stalin’s death. Khrushchev was a member of the communist party and so would not have to rely on secondary sources. Source G gives us reasons for the actions of Stalin. Khrushchev says that ‘this should be done in the interests of the party and of the working masses’. This was true because although Stalin purged between 8-14 million people during his reign of power. Many great achievements were created. Production of steel, iron, electricity and coal rose by vast amounts. What had taken the Capitalist nations of the West fifty to one hundred years took Russia just ten years. Projects such as the Moscow underground and the Dneiper dam were created. Literacy doubled in urban areas and new cities were created. Out of a population of one hundred and twenty five million, eight to fourteen million people were purged. This is a relatively small percentage, about ten percent. It could be said that ten percent of the population of the population suffered to benefit the ‘masses’ (the other ninety percent) as well as future generations. Khrushchev claims in this source that Stalin was a utilitarianist, who purged a minority, so that the majority and future generations might benefit from Stalin’s policies. The source is interesting as Khrushchev mentions, publicly although it was a supposedly secret speech, about the ‘terror and executions’. This suggests that the policy of ‘socialist realism’ has been relaxed to allow the ‘covered up’ aspects of Stalin’s regime to be released. This means that the source could be more accurate than it would have been under the reign of Stalin as there was no censorship. Khrushchev does not say in this source anything of his own opinions of Stalin, excluding ‘we cannot say that these were the deeds of a mad despot’. Khrushchev simply states Stalin’s justifications of the results of Stalin’s reign of power. This means that the source is probably true because he does not include his own opinion and so the source is objective. Source G depicts Stalin as a man and not a monster because it gives reasons for why Stalin committed some of the atrocities that he did. These reasons that could be claimed for the atrocities that were committed were for the benefit of Russians as a collective and so were not as bad as they appear to on first impressions.
Source H is an extract from a speech at the same event as source G. Khrushchev was a member of the communist party and so would not have to rely on secondary sources.
Source H describes Stalin as being very distrustful of people, almost to the point of paranoia. This is true because Stalin purged thirteen out of fifteen generals and in 1934, there were one thousand, nine hundred and sixty-six delegates at the party congress, by 1936 only eight hundred and fifty eight remained. This evidence supports Khrushchev’s statement that ‘this suspicion created in him a general distrust towards party members he had known for years’. Another piece of evidence that we can use here is the assassination of Kirov. On 1st December 1934 Nikolayev, who bore a grudge against Kirov entered Kirov’s building and shot Kirov. Nikolayev had been trained by the N.K.B.D., which was lead by Yagoda. Kirov was awarded a full state funeral but Stalin’s response was to issue a decree sanctioning the death penalty against acts of terror. Stalin organised Kirov’s murder and then covered his tracks. Nikolayev was shot and Kirov’s bodyguard was clubbed to death.
Khrushchev also says that ‘everywhere he saw enemies, ‘double dealers’ and spies’. This is probably a reference to the show trials of the high ranking party members – in 1934, there were one thousand, nine hundred and sixty-six delegates at the party congress, by 1936 only eight hundred and fifty eight remained. Stalin believed that Trotsky had too much power and so had him deported and then killed him in 1940. This source agrees with the fact that Stalin was deeply distrustful of foreigners because he thought that they were capitalist spies. This is true because the ‘commitern’ that Trotsky set up to export communism worldwide was disbanded because Stalin did not trust foreigners. Source H claims that Stalin was a monster, no a man, because he was paranoid and killed people for no apparent reason other than his own suspicions.
Source I is a cartoon that was published in America. It depicts Stalin as a prosecutor with a scribe who is taking notes on the trial. All of the defendants are professing their own guilt, to the point of mocking the trials as they have quite clearly been told to say what they are saying. There are soldiers in the background who are guarding the doors of the courtroom where there is a set of gallows which signifys that no-matter what the outcome of the trial was, the defendants would be executed. The soldiers symbolise the N.K.B.D., who were willing to carry out whatever they were ordered to do. Stalin is in control as he is overseeing the trial. The piece of paper that Stalin is holding is blank, which could show that the fate of the defendants was already sealed or that Stalin simply made up the charges and the defendants admitted to them..
Source I shows the show trials as nothing more than several people confessing to various trumped up charges after being subjected to torture, having threats made against their families. Some examples of people who were subjected to show trials were Kamenev and Zinoviev who were accused of being ‘a gang of murderers, wreckers and spies’; they were also called Fascist Trotsky. Other victims of show trials were forced to confess to poisoning workers, blowing up mines and factories, causing train collisions in the U.S.S.R. and some even had to confess to trying to re-impose the landlords and re-establishing capitalism. Several were even accused by the prosecutor of wanting to break up the U.S.S.R. by giving Ukraine to the Germans and the Far East and Japan.
Stalin often tried to pretend that Russia was democratic, such as in 1936 when he announced that he had formed a new constitution and he had the audacity to call it the most democratic constitution in the world. The constitution appeared to promise greater freedom and more civic rights but was in fact only an illusion of greater democracy, The constitution confirmed Stalin’s dictorial control of the U.S.S.R. and he re-wrote history to shower himself with praise. This cartoon shows that although Stalin tries to make Russia seem like a democratic nation, Russia is simply a totalitarian state where Stalin ‘calls the shots’. This source depicts Stalin as a monster and not a man.
Source J is a cartoon that was published in Paris in the late 1930s. At this time, Paris was a democratic country and so allowed freedom of speech. This means that the cartoon would not have been censored. This cartoon depicts Stalin as the judge, the jury, the lawyer and the scribe.
Source J shows us what Russian society was really like. The fact that Stalin is depicted in source J as everyone in the courtroom, it shows that Russia was a totalitarianist state. Stalin used the N.K.V.D. to inflict fear into the people of Russia, and so would do whatever Stalin told them to do. This means that Stalin could tells anybody to do what he wanted and so Stain, in practical terms, was everyone. This source depicts Stalin as a monster and not a man.
Source K was published in Russia in 1947. It was written in a Russian biography of Stalin. Due to the policy of ‘socialist realism’ that had been enforced when the source was written, the contents are most likely to be missing sections that were critical of Stalin. This means that the source may contain sections which are not true but were used as Russian propaganda and as a means to ensure that the author himself would not be sent to the gulags. It is a subjective one-sided source and so cannot be trusted too heavily. The source depicts Stalin as a man.
Source L is an extract from a Biography of Stalin which was published in Britain in 1983, after the death of Stalin and describes Stalin as a ‘ruthless politician’ who then became ‘a monstrous tyrant’ after being ‘corrupted by absolute power’. Source L acknowledges that Stalin was not without flaws. The author of source L claims that Stalin had ‘a dark and evil side’ to his nature. This source was published in Britain after the death of Stalin. Source L is a balanced account because it describes the flaws of Stalin and also his strengths. Source L claims that Stalin was a ‘gifted politician’ and the author even goes so far as to say that Stalin was ‘one of the greatest political figures of the twentieth century’. The author is obviously full of praise for Stalin’s achievements. Source L claims that Stalin was a man and not a monster because it claims that he was a very good politician, but was not without flaws.
Source M comments, but it differs in that it focuses entirely on Stalin’s ‘evil side’ and does not give a balanced account. Source M implies that Stalin achieved nothing in his life and during his time, as leader of Russia as the author says ‘the explanation of his life…’. Source M is very one sided as it denounces Stalin – makes him look bad and so is likely to be less reliable that a balanced source such as source L.
Source M claims that Stalin was simply ‘corrupted by absolute power’ into ‘a murderous tyrant’ and also mentions ‘the terror’, almost certainly referring to the purges where Stalin killed 8-14 million Russians. This source depicts Stalin as a monster
I believe that Stalin achieved a great many things for Russia, he advanced their industries from a point at which they were fifty to one hundred years behind the West and allowed them to repel the invading, seemingly invincible German army. He achieved in his five year plans what had taken the Western, capitalist nations fifty to one hundred years. Russia was no longer a feudal, backward agricultural nation but an industrialised major world power. He built many new industrial towns like Magnitogorsk, he provided electricity for all the new and existed cities and towns. Despite these great achievements, I believe that Stalin was a monster because he sacrificed too many human lives and increased hostilities towards the West, almost leading to nuclear warfare and the end of the world. He killed 5 to 7 million Ukrainians in a ‘man-made famine’, 5 million ‘kulaks’, his close friends, advisors and family. He remains the largest mass-murderer in history as the death toll of people who were killed as a direct result of Stalin’s policies was 8 to 14 million of his people. Due to the great feeling of fear in Russia at the time, we may never know the true figure as people lived in fear of their lives, the slightest mistake could lead to death, and Stalin even killed children, insinuating even further that Stalin was not a man but a monster
How Far Do The Two Sources Agree About Stalin’s Show Trials?
Source I is a cartoon that was published in America. It depicts Stalin as a prosecutor with a scribe who is taking notes on the trial. All of the defendants are professing their own guilt, to the point of mocking the trials as they have quite clearly been told to say what they are saying. There are soldiers in the background who are guarding the doors of the courtroom where there is a set of gallows.
This source shows the show trials as nothing more than several people confessing to various trumped up charges after being subjected to torture, having threats made against their families. Some examples of people who were subjected to show trials were Kamenev and Zinoviev who were accused of being ‘a gang of murderers, wreckers and spies’; they were also called Fascist Trotsky. Other victims of show trials were forced to confess to poisoning workers, blowing up mines and factories, causing train collisions in the U.S.S.R. and some even had to confess to trying to re-impose the landlords and re-establishing capitalism. Several were even accused by the prosecutor of wanting to break up the U.S.S.R. by giving Ukraine to the Germans and the Far East and Japan.
Often the accused members were so broken that they committed suicide before the trial began. The trials were usually remarkable, not just for the ridiculous charges and the accused confessing to committing those crimes but that Stalin expected people to believe that the trials were fair. People were often willing to say anything at a trial, such as those in the cartoon, after being subjected to months of torture and false promises of lenient sentences. ‘Pravda’ (which ironically translates as truth as it was censored by the ‘socialist realism’ policy), the communist newspaper, published the trials and the chief prosecutor, Vyshinsky who is standing next to Stalin, called the defendants ‘mad dogs of Capitalism’. The defendants were almost always shot, or in some cases sent to the gulags.
The gallows in the picture signify that no-matter what the outcome of the trial was, the defendants would be executed. The soldiers symbolise the N.K.B.D., who were willing to carry out whatever they were ordered to do. Stalin is in control as he is overseeing the trial. The piece of paper that Stalin is holding is blank, which could show that the fate of the defendants was already sealed or that Stalin simply made up the charges and the defendants admitted to them.
Stalin often tried to pretend that Russia was democratic, such as in 1936 when he announced that he had formed a new constitution and he had the audacity to call it the most democratic constitution in the world. The constitution appeared to promise greater freedom and more civic rights but was in fact only an illusion of greater democracy, The constitution confirmed Stalin’s dictorial control of the U.S.S.R. and he re-wrote history to shower himself with praise. This cartoon shows that although Stalin tries to make Russia seem like a democratic nation, Russia is simply a totalitarian state where Stalin ‘calls the shots’.
Source I is a cartoon that was published in Paris in the late 1930s. At this time, Paris was a democratic country and so allowed freedom of speech. This means that the cartoon would not have been censored. This cartoon depicts Stalin as the judge, the jury, the lawyer and the scribe.
This cartoon shows us about Russian society. The fact that Stalin is depicted in source J as everyone in the courtroom, it shows that Russia was a totalitarianist state. Stalin used the N.K.V.D. to inflict fear into the people of Russia, and so would do whatever Stalin told them to do. This means that Stalin could tells anybody to do what he wanted and so Stain, in practical terms, was everyone.
This source is ludicrous as Stalin is everywhere and there is no accused. This is possibly because what they did or said, or who they were was not important. Stalin simply wanted to show the rest of the worlds that Russia was a democratic nation but it was obvious that this was not the case.
Even though the trial is not important as the outcome would have been decided long before anybody was formally, the entire trial has to be annotated to be used for propaganda purposes to ‘brainwash’ the Russian people that the accused were to blame for the problems of Russia.
Source J is mocking Russia as a whole, rather than just the show trials. This is because the cartoonist is saying that no matter how democratic Russia tries to make anything, Stalin is still in control as he has control over everyone. Source I is mocking the actual trials and, although it does illustrate how un-democratic Russia is, the main focus is on the trails themselves.
Both sources were written in Capitalist countries and both sources portray the show trials as absurd and un-democratic. They both show that Stalin was in control of Russia and that the outcome of the trials has already been decided.
Source J is very serious, as Stalin’s posture is one of Authority as he speaks whereas in Source I, the posture of those who are accused is comical, seeking to belittle the democratic element in Russia even more. The reason for this could be that America was not involved in the war until a later date and so could use a comedy to undermine Russia. France was in the war, which at that time was against Germany, and Russia was allied to Germany following the Rapallo Treaty of 1922. This means that the French would be much more hostile towards Russia and so would use a much more serious tone.
Source J does not show the accused, and it does not show what will happen to the accused, probably as the cartoon is focussing on Russia’s totalitarianist regime by using the show trials as an example, rather than directly mocking the show trials.
