- Lenin and Stalin had very different approaches to communism, and to governing. Lenin was the first communist ruler of a formerly capitalist country. Because of this, he felt the need to have a more moderate government. A key part of this was the New Economic Policy, which granted some economic freedoms to Russian farmers. Stalin believed that Lenin's Soviet Union was not truly communist because of the NEP, so as soon as he took office, he revoked it. Stalin was far more radical than Lenin, which made him popular with younger Soviets. Additionally, Lenin believed in self-governance of conquered territories while Stalin wanted to keep them under Soviet control. Stalin's policies built the Eastern Bloc.
- Stalin's key policy was the 5 Year Plan, which was meant to jumpstart the industrial success of the country
- This was necessary, because he was trying to start an industrial revolution in a primarily agrarian country, so some things would have to change.
- Lenin was more effective than Stalin. He was able to successfully establish a new form of government, with the help of revolutionaries. Stalin made many crucial changes to the structure of the Soviet Union, but he was only modifying something that already existed. He was not a trailblazer, and he was not a revolutionary, unlike Lenin.
- Both men took cues from the people they governed. Lenin knew that a more moderate approach to communism would be a good way to start the USSR, because its citizens were used to capitalism. Stalin instead listened to the more radical ideas supported by the younger Soviets. These versions of the Soviet Union were very different, but they reflected what the people wanted, or needed, which makes Lenin and Stalin similar.
What were the primary ways Stalin affected Europe during and after WWII?
- Stalin inspired fear, both at home and abroad. This allowed him to have complete control of not only his country, but his satellite countries as well. This control is what made it so easy for communism to spread throughout eastern Europe.
- He created a divide between his countries and the rest of the world, because there were truly no other countries like the Soviet Union or the other eastern European countries he controlled.
- He rapidly industrialized Russia in order to make them a global contender in future wars. This industrialization and militarization was largely uninterrupted because of Russia's prime geographic location: it was surrounded by allied states who would protect it against westerners. This industrialization eventually led to the arms race that would be the Cold War.
- He was willing to do whatever it took to keep his power, including killing anyone who he considered to be an enemy of the state, often in pogroms.
What is totalitarianism?
- Totalitarianism: a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state
- Totalitarianism has an emphasis on government rule: the state, set of laws, dictator
- All citizens must follow the government completely
- Totalitarianism has a focus on foreign, not domestic, enemies
- Absolutism is the absolute power of one ruler who controls every facet of life
- It's about an internal power struggle, normally with the aristocracy
- Both systems rely on weakening their rivals, whether these rivals are citizens or other countries
What's happening in Germany?
- Hitler was able to rise to power easily because people were desperate for change
- Weimar Republic
- It was very similar to the other governments that replaced the failed states of WWI (pretty much every country experienced a governmental overhaul in which they replaced their hereditary monarchies with republics)
- Why did it fail?
- Reparations had ruined the economy
- The rulers were not charismatic enough to earn the wholehearted support of the people like Hitler was able to
- Social Democratic Party
- Same one from the Bismarck era
- The other two parties from that era were the Catholic Central Party and the Social Revolutionaries
- They became the leaders of the country
- They were ineffective because they had to fight battles on both sides of the aisle
- They were the only moderates in a country filled with socialists and fascists
- Side note: fascism is a subset of totalitarianism (in the squares and rectangles model, fascism is the square, and totalitarianism is the rectangle)
Did European countries respond to the Great Depression the same way the US did?
- The responses were very different; in Europe, economies broke down to the point that a world war began.
- Scandinavian countries had a similar approach to the US
- Both implemented social welfare programs and began public works projects to increase employment. This was basically the same as the New Deal.
- They followed the Keynesian principle of deficit spending in order to be successful and end their depression.
What about the Munich Conference?
- Neville Chamberlain is the British prime minister at this point
- It was a meeting between Chamberlain and Hitler, which was notable because Chamberlain flew all the way to Germany in a rickety, primitive plane to meet with Hitler. Unfortunately, Hitler manipulated Chamberlain into thinking that he had secured a victory for the allies. After the meeting, Chamberlain proclaimed "I have secured peace in our time," which could not have been further from the truth.
- The Munich Conference relied on appeasing Hitler; however, Hitler was insatiable. Once he got what he wanted, he set his sights higher.
 |
| Chamberlain declaring: "I have secured peace in our time" |
No comments:
Post a Comment