Relationship Between Stalin And Khrushchev

177 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: Joseph Stalin's rise to power

Once Stalin was out of the picture Khrushchev was named the successor. Like Stalin, he climbed the communist latter behind the scenes. There is much to be said about Stalin and Khrushchev’s relationship but one would note that Khrushchev would turn out to be a genuine man of the people. Khrushchev came from a peasant family and was generally uneducated. However, he grew to power and popularity and saw the window of opportunity after Stalin’s unexpected death in 1953. Khrushchev was tough, resourceful, and independent, three traits that were important for rebuilding Russia’s infrastructure. Khrushchev gave a secret speech to the twentieth congress, denouncing Stalin of his crimes, paranoia, and cult-personality. Khrushchev proved to be an effective

Show More
Related

  • The Development of Totalitarianism Under Stalin

    523 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Development of Totalitarianism Under Stalin By 1928, Stalin had become the undisputed successor to Lenin, and leader of the CPSU. Stalin’s power of appointment had filled the aisles of the Party Congress and Politburo with Stalinist supporters. Political discussion slowly faded away from the Party, and this led to the development of the totalitarian state of the USSR. Stalin, through.

    Read More

  • Khrushchev's Peaceful Coexistence And Secret Speech

    303 Words  | 1 Pages

    Despite the appearance of goodwill exhibited in Khrushchev’s speeches, a Western leader would be inherently skeptical of the Stalin crony as he attempts to gain and maintain power over the Soviet Union and his own party. An obvious politician, Khrushchev’s “peaceful coexistence” and “Secret Speech” in February 1956 served to distance him from the unpopular and failing Stalinist approach of communist control. His rhetoric, however, remains no less expansionist than his predecessor. Specifically, in his comments on “peaceful coexistence”, Khrushchev emphasized the ultimate triumph of the socialist system, but concedes that military intervention alone will not achieve such a victory (Judge & Langdon, 339). Rhetoric aside, one must consider Khrushchev’s

    Read More

  • Jfk And The Cold War

    1088 Words  | 3 Pages

    Khrushchev rose steadily up the party ladder, always combining his talents as an administrator with his technical training. After assignments in the Ukraine, he became head of the Moscow regional party committee, and in 1934 he became a member of the Central Committee of the Soviet Communist party. In these positions he directed the construction of the Moscow subway. Although increasingly influential, Khrushchev was never an intimate associate of Joseph Stalin; he concentrated on technical rather than political accomplishment. After World War II he was brought back to Moscow, where he became ¡¥one of stalin¡¦s top advisers¡¦. When Stalin died in 1953, Khrushchev used his wit to thrust all his opponents for leadership, including Malenkov. He became both Party Secretary and controlled the government through his associate Marshal Bulganin, who he named Premier. He ruled from 1956 to 1964.

    Read More

  • Comparing Joseph Stalin and Fidel Castro

    1377 Words  | 3 Pages

    There have been many dictators through out history that have shaped the way we look at them now. Sometimes it’s the way that dictators came to power that people judge them on. Sometimes it’s how long they stayed in power, but it’s not just how long they stayed in power. It’s what they did to stay in power. These two men are some of the most infamous dictators for those reasons alone. These men are Joseph Stalin and Fidel Castro, and they played a huge part in shaping the way we look at dictators today.

    Read More

  • Joseph Stalin

    837 Words  | 2 Pages

    Son of a poverty-stricken shoemaker, raised in a backward province, Joseph Stalin had only a minimum of education. However, he had a burning faith in the destiny of social revolution and an iron determination to play a prominent role in it. His rise to power was bloody and bold, yet under his leadership, in an unexplainable twenty-nine years, Russia because a highly industrialized nation. Stalin was a despotic ruler who more than any other individual molded the features that characterized the Soviet regime and shaped the direction of Europe after World War II ended in 1945. From a young revolutionist to an absolute master of Soviet Russia, Joseph Stalin cast his shadow over the entire globe through his provocative affair in Domestic and Foreign policy.

    Read More

  • Similarities And Differences Between Lenin And Stalin

    2265 Words  | 5 Pages

    Isaac Murrin Mr. J. Pharion Freshman English 20 February 2013 The Similarities and Differences between Lenin and Stalin Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin were similar in what they claimed to be, but in actuality they were very different people. Although Stalin claimed that he followed Leninism, the philosophy that Lenin developed from Marxism, he often distorted it to follow what he wanted to do. While Lenin wanted to make a unified society without classes, with production in the hands of the people, while Stalin wanted to make Russia into a modern industrial powerhouse by using the government to control production. Lenin accomplished his goals through violence, because he thought achieving the Communist revolution was worth using violence, with a ‘The ends justify the means’ mentality. Stalin also used violence to accomplish his goals, however Stalin used much more violence than was often necessary to accomplish his goals.

    Read More

  • Stalin Vs. Hitler

    2651 Words  | 6 Pages

    Josef Stalin, a politician from the earliest beginnings of his life, strove to achieve a national sense of power during his reign over the citizens of Russia. Adolf Hitler, however, a born high school dropout somewhat longed for a place in life. He rather fell into his role as a politician, after his brief shortcomings in arts and sciences. These two individuals developed varying ideas to put their controlling minds to work to lead their political parties in the direction of total domination of the state.

    Read More

  • Stalin and Mao were both partners and competitors

    1844 Words  | 4 Pages

    As two historical giants, Stalin and Mao Ze-dong must be involved at the mere mention of the Sino-Soviet relationship. The relation between the two states leaders draws the outline of the basic structure of Sino-Soviet relations. In the memory of the generation of 1950s to 1970s, there usually five portraits were hung in public, which were Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and Mao Ze-dong, even in Tian An Men’s lobby, as the leaders of International Communist Movement and the greatest teachers of the revolution. To be honest, for the generation of 1950s to 1970s, Marx, Engels and Lenin could be ‘deity’ who were in the distance, but Stalin and Mao were alive in the same world, and they were real mentors. Both of them were the revolutionary leaders, and both had distinct characters, as same as common, both men own the merits, the weaknesses, the temper and the natural instincts. During the long-term contact between Stalin and Mao, they left many fascinating stories, and numerous profound lessons. With the same communism belief, Stalin helped Mao fight for sovereignty in China, and provided actively various kinds of weapons, such as canons, tanks, rifles and machine guns, and tried to give useful idea and constructive advice. Two such extraordinary person met, friendship developed with contradiction. They were communists, and also they were leaders of different countries. As leaders of distinct sovereignty states, Stalin and Mao usually care much about their countries’ interests. In other words, Stalin and Mao were strategic partners. After Stalin was attacked in the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), Mao talked about repeatedly that Stalin tricked China four times and forbade Ma...

    Read More

  • Individuals During Stalin's Regime

    861 Words  | 2 Pages

    A leader is defined as a guiding or directing head. Stalin was the leader of the party that was in charge of the Soviet Union. He created a totalitarian regime which brought great suffering to the Russian people. The individual Russian played two distinct roles under Stalin. One role would be that of a person who under Stalin’s system was no different than the person who is standing next to them. Everyone was treated equal in all facets. The other role the individual Russian played was that of a victim. We are able to see by many different accounts that an individual had different roles to play and under Stalin, each role came with a price that sometimes lead to death. The role of the individual Russian played a huge role in Stalin’s aim at creating a stronghold on a nation that ended up imprisoning and killing millions of its own people

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Fdr And Stalin

    612 Words  | 2 Pages

    Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt led the nation through the second world war. Roosevelt built a powerful wartime coalition with Britain and the Soviet Union, and led the U.S to victory against Nazi Germany. He was elected for presidency four times, serving from 1933 until his death in 1945. His wartime efforts prepared the path for Harry Truman, to win the war against Japan four months after his death.

    Read More

  • Joseph Stalin Research Paper

    592 Words  | 2 Pages

    Joseph Stalin became leader of the USSR after Lenin’s death in 1924. Lenin had a government of abstemious communist government. When Stalin came into government he moved to a radical communist society. He moved away from the somewhat capitalist/communist economy of Lenin time to “modernize” the USSR. He wanted to industrialize and modernize USSR. He had overworked his workers, his people were dying, and most of them in slave labor camps. In fact by doing this Stalin had hindered the USSR and put them even farther back in time.

    Read More

  • Khrushchev: The Destalinization Of The Soviet Union

    456 Words  | 1 Pages

    Khrushchev was still a powerful and ruthless man. However, he was considered much more moderate than Stalin. Additionally, Khrushchev highly disapproved of Stalin’s purges. Throughout the duration of these purges, Stalin killed over half a million people who opposed his points of view. Lastly, Khrushchev highly opposed Stalin’s conduct of World War

    Read More

  • U-2 Incident

    1151 Words  | 3 Pages

    into the Eisenhower presidency, gave rise to hopes of a more flexible, accommodating Soviet leadership. In 1953, Eisenhower delivered a speech underscoring the potential human cost of the Cold War to both sides. Hoping to strike a more compatible tone with Georgi. Malenkov, Stalin's successor, Eisenhower suggested the Soviets cease their brazen expansion of territory and influence in exchange for American cooperation and goodwill. The Soviets responded coolly to the speech.

    Read More

  • De-Stalinization

    1170 Words  | 3 Pages

    The process of de-Stalinization was the political restructuring that took place in the Soviet Union through several significant incidents after the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953. These reforms intended to eradicate the horrific institutions established by Stalin, under whom the people of Ukraine experienced severe mental and social anguish. De-Stalinization began in 1956, when Nikita Khrushchev was elected as the First Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party. Khrushchev launched new reforms that abominated the doings of his predecessor and shattered Stalin’s persona as an infallible leader. The three key elements of de-Stalinization, also referred to as the Thaw, are bold authoritative pronouncements that started the process, introduction

    Read More

  • Destalinization

    2948 Words  | 6 Pages

    Politics has always been about image. A good image leads to power, it's that simple. Sometimes it is hard to draw the line between a leader who is genuinely interested in improving the lives of his people and one that is interested in filling a few more pages of the already crowded History book. A good example of this is the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in its transition time between 1953 and 1964. The tyrannical rule of Joseph Stalin in the USSR was finally over, and the nation sought a new leader; after nearly a decade, one man, Nikita Khrushchev, rose up from the ranks with new ideas for the nation, and an extreme anti-Stalin campaign. But was he truly enraged at the way Stalin ruled or was he using this image in an attempt to capture the same power as his predecessor? The link between the two leaders goes back many years, to nearly the beginning of the communist annexation of Russia. Even today, we find ourselves asking if the politicians we vote for say they will make a reform to actually help the people, or if they say it as an empty promise in a ploy to get elected or to gain power. Was Nikita Khrushchev a man for the people, or was he simply a puppet with motives unseen to the people that pulled his strings?

    Read More

More about Relationship Between Stalin And Khrushchev

Open Document