The Europe History since 1900: Compare Stalin and Hitler - Assignment Example

? Comparing Hitler and Stalin Table of Contents I. Introduction 3 II. Comparing Stalin and Hitler- Looking at Primary Sources 4 A. Molotov/Russia's Reaction to the German Invasion of Russia in 1941 4 B. The Purges of Stalin, 1935, Textbook Explanations 5 C. Stalin's 1928 Work 'Industrialization of the Country' 5 D. Hitler's 1933 Speech 6 E. Khrushchev's 1956 Speech on the Personality Cult and Stalin 7 References 8 I. Introduction This paper examines five primary sources on Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin in the context of their roles in European and world history, and in the context of critical analyses of the sources. The paper also details the learnings that were gleaned from the primary sources after the analysis. How do the primary sources come together to inform the researcher about Hitler and Stalin? What are their values relative to each other? The paper also looks at secondary sources to aid in the analysis and assessment of the primary sources, as appropriate. In gist the two leaders share many similarities in terms of ambition and in the ruthlessness and catastrophic consequences of their rule. The primary sources reveal various details about those aspects of the lives and rule of the two personalities, even as the secondary sources give an overarching context with which to view the presented materials. The literature suggests that both Hitler and Stalin displayed boldness, ambition, egoism, and ruthlessness and brutality within their territories and in pursuit of the expansion of what amounted to their empires. Both were also driven by ideas and ideologies, with Stalin being driven by a Communist ideology and the desire to see that ideology gaining traction in the rest of the world, and Hitler likewise being driven by an anti-Semitic ideology and the ideology that the Aryan race is superior to the rest of the world's races, among other things. The aim is to be able to glean insights into these overarching themes and details of the comparison from the primary sources, supported by insights from the secondary sources too. Whatever the differences, it is clear from the literature that both Stalin and Hitler used extraordinary brutal methods, with laser-like focus on the achievement of results and with much bloodshed and terror, to achieve the objectives of their totalitarian regimes. The numbers of dead at the end were in the millions of people, even as their reach and influence in the matter of inflicting terror were in the hundreds of millions of people (Raack 1991; A+E Television Networks 2013; Walker 2013; Jones 2012; The Economist 1999; Snyder 2011). II. Comparing Stalin and Hitler- Looking at Primary Sources A. Molotov/Russia's Reaction to the German Invasion of Russia in 1941 The primary source details the reaction of the Soviets to the invasion of Russia by the German forces under the leadership of Adolf Hitler. It is to be noted that Hitler espoused the ideology of the right of the Aryan people to carve a living space out of Russia. That doctrine of the living space, viewed another way, can be seen as the expression of Hitler's own ambitions to expand and to conquer the neighboring territories to the east of the country. That includes Russia. This invasion was preceded by a pact between the Soviet Union and Germany signed two years prior, known as the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. That 1939 pact, while temporarily shielding the Soviet Union from German aggression, nevertheless was instrumental for Germany being able to act out its aggression towards Poland, and primed Germany and Hitler to become bolder and make an attempt to annex Russia via that invasion. It is to be noted too, that during this time, the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin largely viewed itself as the passive victim of what amounted to a bold and “predatory” move by Germany, and in contravention of the non-aggression treaty that it signed with the Soviet Union two years prior (Molotov 1941). The primary source is noteworthy for its direct mention of Hitler and noteworthy too for the direct confrontation that occurred between Stalin and Hitler via that act of invasion. Two years prior too we get from the primary source that the two parties had agreed on a pact. The underlying dynamics of the aggression presented itself in the source too, with the Soviet Union reading the pronouncements of Hitler with regard to the Soviets' breaking the terms of the non-aggression pact as a lie and a pretense to launching the attack. Stripped of context and viewed in terms of the aggression and the results of that aggression, one is able to glean substantial insights into the personalities and turns of mind of the two protagonists, Stalin and Hitler, and how similar and different they are at the same time (Molotov 1941). B. The Purges of Stalin, 1935, Textbook Explanations Domestically, the purges made by Stalin to solidify his hold on power has its parallels in the purges of Germany and the occupied territories of Jews by Hitler, and both were characterized by horrific loses in human lives. Both too were justified by a recourse to thinking relating to ideologies (A+E Television Networks 2013; Walker 2013; Jones 2012; The Economist 1999; Snyder 2011; Halsall 1997). What is noteworthy about the primary source considered here is that the justifications had the official sanction of the Stalin regime, but were later junked by Stalin's successors. Moreover, a cursory look at the document is full of references to Communist dogma and the justification of the use of violence in order for the Communist Party to achieve ideological ends. On the other hand, from a political point of view, the justifications can be seen as masking a more mundane underlying reason, and that is of Stalin wanting to eradicate all vestiges of opposition to his leadership. Taken on its own, the document highlights the underlying politics that led to the purges, from the point of view of the establishment. That establishment is headed by Stalin, and the opposition consists of those forces that were aligned with Trotsky, or were perceived to be a threat to Stalin's hold on power. From the point of view of comparative literature, and situating the document in the context of a larger body of historical work, the primary source is an artifact of Stalin's regime and useful as such. Its objectivity on the other hand is of course debunked (Halsall 1997). C. Stalin's 1928 Work 'Industrialization of the Country' This work provides a glimpse into the inner workings of the mind of Stalin, and how different or similar that mind is to the mind of Hitler. Looking at the primary source on its own, the primary source provides an overview of what Stalin's thoughts were with regard to the Two Five Year Plans that pushed the Soviet Union to achieve its industrialization goals. This period covered the years from 1928 all the way to 1933, and was marked by outward success relative to those goals. On the other hand, as the literature suggests, that success came at the cost of the suffering of a great number of people. It is noteworthy too that in this document Stalin sees the western economic model as being a threat to the existence of the Soviet Union, highlighting how Stalin imbibed ideology as the primary means of defining himself and his rule in the backdrop of western capitalist models. In this sense, the drive to define the regime in terms of an ideology, applied to the economy, is similar to Hitler's defining his regime in terms of ideas relating to Aryan superiority and the need for the Germans to carve their own space, while domestically persecuting the Jews (A+E Television Networks 2013; Walker 2013; Jones 2012; The Economist 1999; Snyder 2011; Stalin 1928). Situating the primary source in the context of the comparison between Hitler and Stalin, one can interpret the piece in various ways, one of them being that the piece and other similar pieces is an attempt on the part of Stalin to legitimize the use of violence and the use of the labor of the masses for ideological ends. The piece seems well-written and very lucid, but has constant references to party ideology, from which lens Stalin interpreted the threat of the west, the economy of the Soviet Union and the threats from within and without, and how to go about plotting the course of the Soviet Union economy (Stalin 1928). D. Hitler's 1933 Speech Where Stalin's work on the justification of the two Five Year plans give us a picture of the workings of his mind, the speeches of Hitler do the same thing, and provide a first-hand glimpse into Hitler's thought processes. There is in both personalities a strong inclination to view oneself as being in the right, and of having the conviction of standing on the right ideology and idea. What is missing from the work of Stalin, and which is present in the video, is the presence that the video provides of the person of Hitler himself. This has value beyond the words, in being to get a subjective measure of the sense of power that Hitler had over his ideas and over the people that he ruled. The annotation also describes the speech as being the first that Hitler made after ascending to power in Germany in 1933. The differences in the two primary sources extend to Stalin's work being more detailed and appealing more to the intellect than Hitler's live speech, which appealed too to the emotions (Hitler 1933; Stalin 1928), E. Khrushchev's 1956 Speech on the Personality Cult and Stalin Khrushchev's speech is insightful with regard to providing details on the personality traits of Stalin seen from the perspective of his comrades and from the vantage point of a party insider looking back and assessing the history and the abuses and excesses of Stalin's regime. This speech was made many years after the reign of Stalin, and is useful in many respects, including in being able to glean insights into the politics of Stalin's time, and what the underlying dynamics of the rule and the ascent to power of Stalin were. In the time of Stalin the primary sources from the country obviously favored Stalin, An insider's view of Stalin from the vantage point of someone in power but was no longer under the grip of Stalin's influence is valuable as a primary source of somewhat objective information on the character and personality of Stalin (Khrushchev 1956).. References Jones, Nigel. “From Stalin to Hitler, the most murderous regimes in the world”. Mail Online. 28 January 2012. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2091670/Hitler-Stalin-The-murderous-regimes-world.html {Accessed 10 November 2013) Halsall, Paul. “Stalin's Purges, 1935”. Modern History Sourcebook/History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks): Short Course. 1997/1948. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1936purges.html{Accessed 10 November 2013) Hitler, Adolf. “1933 Speech”. YouTube. 1933. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHHr2SNjbnc (Accessed 10 November 2013) Khrushchev, Nikita. “On the Cult of Personality, 1956”. Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 84th Congress, 2nd Session. 1956. http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/mod/1956khrushchev-secret1.asp (Accessed 10 November 2013) Molotov, Vyacheslav. “Molotov: Reaction to German Invasion of 1941”. Modern History Sourcebook. 22 June 1941. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1941molotov.html {Accessed 10 November 2013) Snyder, Timothy. “Hitler vs. Stalin: Who Was Worse?” The New York Review of Books. January 2011. http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2011/jan/27/hitler-vs-stalin-who-was-worse/ {Accessed 10 November 2013) Stalin, Joseph. “Industrialization of the Country and the Right Deviation in the C.P.S.U., November 19,1928” JV Stalin, Works 11. 19 November 1928. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1928stalin.html {Accessed 10 November 2013) The Economist. “The heights of evil” Economist.com. 23 December 1999. http://www.economist.com/node/346857 {Accessed 10 November 2013) Walker, Andy. “1913: When Hitler, Trotsky, Tito, Freud and Stalin all lived in the same place” BBC News Magazine. 17 April 2013. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21859771 {Accessed 10 November 2013) Read More