The blance sheet for russia.
The blance sheet for russia The Russian Revolution of 1917 was one of the greatest events in history. If we leave aside the heroic episode of the Paris Commune, for the first time millions of downtrodden workers and peasants took political power into their own hands, sweeping aside the despotic rule of the capitalists and landlords, and set out to create a socialist world order. Destroying the old Tsarist regime that held sway for a thousand years, they had conquered one-sixth of the world's land surface. The ancien régime was replaced by the rule of a new democratic state system: the Soviet of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies. It heralded the beginning of the world revolution, inspiring the hopes and dreams of millions who had lived through the nightmare of the first world war. Notwithstanding the terrible backwardness of Russia, the new Socialist Soviet Republic represented a decisive threat to the world capitalist order. It struck terror in bourgeois circles, who rightly regarded it as a threat to their power and privileges, but comforted themselves with the notion that the Bolshevik regime was likely to only last a matter of weeks. The nationalised property relations that emerged from the revolution, the foundations of an entirely new social system, entered into direct conflict with the capitalist form of society. Despite the emergence of Stalinism, this
How Successful Was Roosevelt’s New Deal?
How Successful Was Roosevelt's New Deal? Roosevelt set out with clear views on what the New Deal was to do, but not so sure as to what measures this would involve. During the time in which he was campaigning for the election, it became clear the Franklin D. Roosevelt wanted to use the full power of the United States' Government to relieve Americans from the great depression. His main priorities and characteristics are listed below: > Getting Americans back to work > Protecting their savings and property > Providing relief for the sick, old and unemployed > He believed strongly in an 'active Government' to improve the lives of ordinary Americans > He had plans to spend vast quantities of public money on getting people back to work. As Governor of New York he had already started doing this in his own state > He was not afraid to ask for advice on important issues from a wide variety f experts such as factory owners, union leaders or economists He succeeded to some extent in each of these tasks, but getting the American population back to work was a constant headache for him. When Franklin D. Roosevelt came to power the country was in the worst depression that America had ever had. The lack of confidence, by the American public, caused 659 banks to fail in 1929. AS the banks began closing, the people's confidence plummeted and in 1930, another 1352 banks were forced to
Stalin man or monster
STALIN- MAN OR MONSTER? ) Study Sources A, B and C. Do these Sources give similar of different impressions of Stalin? Explain your answer with references to the Sources. (8) 2) Study source D. Does this source provide any useful evidence about Stalin? Explain your answer. (7) 3) Study sources E and F. which of these two sources is the more reliable? Explain your answer. (8) 4) Study Sources G and H. Do you trust Khrushchev's assessments of Stalin? Use your knowledge of Stalin to explain your answer. (7) 5) Study Sources I and J. How far do these Sources agree about Stalin's "show trials?" Explain your answer. (8) 6) Using the sources in this paper and your knowledge of Stalin explain whether or not you think he was a monster. (12) ********* ) Study Sources A, B and C. Do these Sources give similar of different impressions of Stalin? Explain your answer with references to the Sources. (8) Sources A, B and C are sources published throughout the nineteen thirties. All three sources give a separate insight into Stalin's different policies which where inflicted on his own nation, where many people suffered. In this essay I will first outline the points given in each Source and the message behind them, then counter argue the different impressions each source depicts on Stalin's personality and the similarities between the sources. Source A portrays Stalin presenting a
What happened to the Romanov family? - Study Sources A and B. Sources A and B give similar accounts. Does this mean they are reliable?
GCSE HISTORY COURSEWORK: What happened to the Romanov family? (a) Study Sources A and B. Sources A and B give similar accounts. Does this mean they are reliable? Grippingly, it is true that both Sources A and B give similar accounts as they are both different perspectives of the same information which comes from Judge Sergeyev who was the first investigator appointed of the Romanov family murder case by the Whites. He was a supporter of the Provisional Government which was got rid of by the Bolscheviks. Source A is an opinionated and subjective account from an American Newspaper whereas Source B is a generalised extract from Sir Charles's report to the British government. Both nations - America and Britain were against the Bolscheviks suspected of the murder of the Russian Royal Family so the reliability of both sources can be questioned in the context of its author and purpose, tone and content as well as their origin. Clearly, source A and B agree to some extent as they both imply that the Tsarina and her five children were not shot there in the basement of the Ipatiev house where the Romanovs had been captivated but only the Tsar himself. This is evident as Source A mentions, "all the people, the Tsar, his family and those with him, were not shot there and that "the Tsar's son and the four children were not shot in that house." Meanwhile, Source B explains, "Tsar is
'The Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people.' How valid is this judgement?
GCSE HISTORY COURSEWORK: 'The Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people.' How valid is this judgement? ) There are many reasons why Stalin wanted to industrialise Russia so quickly. Stalin who came to power after Lenin was determined to make Russia a successful country by rapid industrialisation. Rather than borrowing money from other countries in order to help Russia, Stalin wanted Russia to do it on its own accord and let the Russian people earn what they got. It was the five-year plans that moved Russia towards becoming a stronger country than it was. Although it may just be seen as a glory hunting phase to make Russia an economic power, it was said by Stalin that, 'We are 50 to 100 years being the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in 10 years. Either we do it or we shall be crushed.' And Stalin was very right in saying this. Stalin embarked on these five-year plans because he did not want his home country to fail and fall to many of the Western countries and ideas that threatened it. He launched three Five Year Plans, the first ran from 1928 - 1932, the second ran from 1933 - 1937 and the third plan ran from 1938 till 1941. hotmail password: rupermaya For each Five Year Plan there was an emphasis on what had to be achieved. The first plan wanted to equip Russia industrially for the second and third plans. It's emphasis was on
What happened to the Romanov Family? Sourcework
History Coursework - What happened to the Romanov Family? Question 1. (a) The fact that the two sources, A and B convey similar accounts of the murder of the Romanov's does not necessarily mean that they are to be trusted as reliable sources. However it does imply that there is likely to be some truth in the content of the sources. The two sources agree in several ways, such as the idea that the tsar was shot in the Ipatiev house, along with the two servants, the maid and the family doctor, Dr Botkin. They also agree on the concept that all of the victims killed were shot dead. There are however, many different points and disagreements between the sources, which suggest that they are unreliable, despite the fact that they share similar content. The first clue that the sources may not be trustworthy is the fact that they are both relying on the account of the same person, Judge Sergeyev. Source A is taken from an American newspaper report, based on Sergeyev's findings, and source B is an account of a British reporter who heard his theory of how the Romanov's died. This means that should Sergeyev be incorrect or concealing the truth, then both sources would be useless, and so both sources are dependant on the honesty, and accuracy of Judge Sergeyev. Both sources use rather vague language when describing their accounts. This means that they can lead the reader into
Stalin Man or Monster
Stalin: Man or Monster? Joseph Stalin was a Soviet dictator who in some people's eyes was a magnificent leader who saved the Russian economy and created a superpower economy. However, others see Stalin as the greatest mass murder in history. Stalin was a man who ruled in the name of the people, yet stopped at no crime for those same people. The views about Stalin differ, some people see him as a man and some as a monster. Q1 Sources A, B and C are all different and similar in various ways. Source A is a cartoon published in Paris during the 1930's. At this time many people in France were anti communist, therefore it is clear that the cartoon would be anti-Stalin. The cartoon shows Stalin standing in front of pyramids of skulls and pointing at them as he is proud of his achievement. The words written on the poster "Visitez l'U.R.S.S SES piyramdes!" in English mean, "Come visit our pyramids". Source B portrays a completely different view of Stalin. This source is an official Soviet painting of Stalin with the workers at a newly opened hydroelectric power station in the 1930's. It shows Stalin dressed in white clothes, smoking a pipe and acting as a father figure to the peasants. The poster shows how involved Stalin is with his people and how modest he is. Source C is a photograph of Stalin congratulating wives of army officers, however, the year it was take in, is
Stalin: Man or Monster?
Stalin: Man or Monster? History Coursework Hasan Khizar (1) Study sources A,B and C. Do these sources give similar or different impressions of Stalin? Explain your answer with references to the sources. To answer this question we have to look at all the sources and interpret what they are trying to tell us about Stalin himself. There are positive sources and also negative sources. I will now try to explain the impression that each source gives of me. If we take source A it states at the bottom that it was published in the 1930's in Paris. It illustrates three pyramids of skulls and vultures flying above them. The skulls are most likely the victims of his purges and policies. He seems to be pointing at the skulls as if he is proud of them, as some sort of achievement. The vultures flying over these pyramids seem to be there to indicate death that is what this cartoon seems to be trying to project about Stalin. It is trying to condemn the Russian leader for his ruthlessness and murderous policies and criticise the way in which he keeps control of his country solely by the use of fear. The source seems to be putting forward a sarcastic tourism theme. It uses the pyramids of Egypt to carry this out. The French writing in the illustration translates to: "Visitez L'URSS ses pyramides". The translation being "Visit the Pyramids of Russia". Overall this source seems to give a
Source related questions on Joseph Stalin
Humanities Coursework Stalin Balraj Singh 11BCC Does the Cartoonist Who Drew Source A Think Stalin is a Good Leader? Explain Your Answer Using Source A And Your Own Knowledge. Source A is a cartoon drawn by David Lowe and was published in the London Evening Standard on the 27th November 1930. David Lowe was a British illustrator who had no remorse for Stalin. As David Lowe lived in Britain, he was able to write negatively about Stalin and get away with it. Had he have done this cartoon in Russia, there would be no doubt that David Lowe would have been murdered. The cartoon shows Stalin standing in a prison with a gun set up to kill him if he pulls a string. The cartoon was drawn in the 1930's and in the bottom right corner says 'prophecies for the future'. Therefore, you get the idea that David Lowe has drawn what he expects to happen in the future. David Lowe has also written 'Old Low's almanac' in the bottom left corner. This adds humour, as people who viewed the cartoon would have heard of 'Old Mow's Almanac', a book released every year telling people of prophecies for the following year. 'Old Low's Almanac' is David Lowe's prophecies for the future and is also a play on words. As well as having Stalin in a prison cell with a contraption set up to kill himself, there are also two ministers dead in the corner. To add to that, there is also a group of 3 reporters,
Stalin: Man or Monster - Sources Questions
HISTORY COURSEWORK STALIN: MAN OR MONSTER ) Source A gives us the impression of Stalin being a murderer, as there are pyramids of human skulls. This could represent the huge amounts of people he had killed, through labour or work camps. I know from my own knowledge and after studying Russia under Stalin's rule that Stalin was responsible for the deaths of millions of people. Therefore this source gives us a pretty good overview of what Stalin was like. Also we can sense a satisfaction or pride that Stalin has from himself after looking at source A. This can be sensed as Stalin is pointing to all the skulls as if it was a thing to be proud of. There is also a caption in the source saying "Visitez L'U.R.S.S. ses pyramides!" Which is another thing that the author uses to show us, Stalin's pride. Source B on the other hand gives us a completely different impression of Stalin. We see him in this source as a good leader that takes interest in his workers. The people shown (who are probably lower class workers) and Stalin are happy on the picture and it gives an impression of a happy, well ruled Russia. The picture is saying that Stalin is a carrying ruler and that he takes interest in even the low class people. Source C seems to give a more similar impression to source B. It seems to show Stalin yet again as a man in a good relationship with his people; even a gentleman.
