Stalinism vs. Hitler

[AggieDave 6]

I'm writing my History Senior Seminar (think of it as a mini-graduate thesis) paper's outline tonight. Of course I'm writing over the two areas of intrest, historically speaking: Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. This stuff is really cool, but its easy to get bogged down, and I only have 10 sources so far.

<--for the lack of sources.

From the looks of what I have so far for just an outline, this paper might end up getting well over 40 pages.

I know this has no bearing on yalls lives, just thought I'd share (and I wanted to take a break to post-whore a little).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[indyz 1]

Do you have Darkness At Noon? It's probably my favorite book on Stalinism.

[AggieDave 6]

No I don't, I saw it but didn't read much of it, just a couple pages.

What's the author(s)' stance on Stalin's foriegn policy?

That Stalin had a "great dream", continuing in Lenin's foot steps for a world revolution, or that Stalin was more of a nationalist?

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[phatcat 0]

I'm a NEWBIE history freak. I have exactly 54 "gotta read" books in the database I made for future buying reference (I'm gonna be busy for awhile.) I have nothing constructive to add, other than good luck!

[indyz 1]

The narrator (it's fiction, for what it's worth) is a former Party bigwig who later in life decided that maybe communism wasn't all it was cracked up to be. He gets thrown in jail and there are a bunch of flashbacks where he reflects on the events that changed him from a Party hardliner to somebody who was liberal enough to be killed (oops, I gave away the ending).

Edit to add: The main story takes place during the purges in the 1930s, and the flashbacks go as far back as the early 1900s, to the Communist underground in prewar Europe.

[AggieDave 6]

Fiction...RIGHT. That's why I put it down. I knew there was a reason I hadn't put that on my list.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[indyz 1]

Quote

Fiction...RIGHT. That's why I put it down. I knew there was a reason I hadn't put that on my list.

I barely fiction, though. The references to real people, places, and events are thinly disguised.

[AggieDave 6]

Yeah, but that won't help me in the academic sense.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[AggieDave 6]

Woohoo, done with the outline. It's only 4 pages long, listing only the main points of the paper, but atleast now I have a solid base to write my paper from.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

...it's fiction...

Darkness at Noon (by Arthur Koestler) is very closely based on the facts of the Laszlo Rajk show trial.
Here's a quick historical link:
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=9525
Let me try to find a better one...
Edit: Still trying to find a source about Koestler's research into the Rajk trial. Here is a pretty good summary of the Rajk case, though. It's drawn from the official indictment.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Gawain 0]

This may be off track for your purposes, but you might see where the legacy of Stalinism affected the Chinese revolution (for better or worse). That might provide some interesting perspective, versus Hilter's "influence" over Italy......just some tired-deep thoughts at 1AM PST...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[medvicsek 0]

I don't know if Koestler ever did any serious research into the Rajk-trial: Darkness at Noon
was written earlier & its hero is modeled after Bukharin.

The best account of the Rajk-trial (surprisingly little research btw, though the Times & NY Times did report about the case in 1949) comes from Hungarian emigre Francois (Ferenc) Fejto who was a friend of Rajk & who, w/ surprisingly astute observation analyzed the whole procedure & called it for what it was: a setup. If you read French, his article in the French journal L'Esprit is an essential read. it's in the 1949 Nov issue: pretty fast on the mark while French communists were still trying to convince themselves that Rajk actually did what he "admitted". In any case, if you're interested in that, email me.

(Btw his History of the People's Democracy is also a basic work on teh issue of Stalinism in Eastern Europe.)

[racer42 0]

How about creating an outline comparing and contrasting those two with the modern day Ba'athists movements in Iraq and Syria. National Socialism and Communism vs a more recent crazyism.
Only a suggestion.

L.A.S.T. #24
Co-Founder Biscuit Brothers Freefly Team
Electric Toaster #3
Co-Founder Team Non Sequitor
Co-Founder Team Happy Sock

[AggieDave 6]

Cool suggestion, but that doesn't fit into my class, being that it is a class over "Stalinism" and not a class comparing him with outside events.

Here's a copy of my final draft, by the way:

Quote

Stalinism and Hitler


Stalin’s foreign policy leading up to the war between Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia had a direct impact on the timing and outcome of the war between the two countries, as well as the rest of the western world; moreover, had a different person been in power over Soviet Russia during this period, specifically Lenin, the series of events leading up to the war as well as the treaties before the war would have been different.
The period following Lenin’s death saw Soviet Russia take a sharp turn in the foreign policy adopted by the state. Joseph Stalin, heading the state, turned the Party’s focus inward, to try to bring Russia up to a modern, industrialized country. This, being a daunting task, required the full attention of Stalin; moreover, after years of waiting, the world revolution that was once envisioned by the upper echelon of the Bolshevik party had not come, nor did it appear to be on the horizon in Western Europe. With these reasons, Stalin focused his attention towards planning the rapid industrialization of Russia and into socializing agriculture. With the Five-Year Plan, he did not focus on the Comintern and the drive towards world revolution. After years of being headed by the Bolshevik leader, the Comintern was now delegated to a party underling, figuratively speaking, to organize Communist parties around the globe.
Stalin’s interest in Western Europe was merely a financial one. The Five-Year Plan required large amounts of capital to purchase the goods and machinery that was needed to create an industrialize infrastructure. Overwhelmingly, the only viable goods that Russia had for the global market was its vast amounts of farmland and the grain it produced, as well as other major natural resources such as lumber. Thus, Stalin’s foreign policy was focused around selling this grain as well as Russia’s other natural resources to those who would purchase them. These natural resources are what brought Stalin and Hitler into accordance before the invasion of Russia by Nazi Germany. Hitler’s war machine, rearming then the beginnings of World War II required large amounts of raw materials, which was obtained by negotiations with Russia. These goods feed the machine that brought Hitler and Nazi Germany into military dominance in Europe. The purchase of raw material from Russia also gave Stalin the capital he desperately needed to make the industrialization of Russia a reality.
The leader of the October Revolution and the theological leader of Soviet Russia, Lenin, had a very international view to his foreign policy. The dream he shared with his Bolshevik followers, was that world revolution would come. The oppressed workers would rise, overthrowing their Capitalist governments. From the beginnings of the Socialist movement in Russia and Lenin’s exile to Germany, his dream was to spur a world revolution by starting with his homeland, Russia.
The Comintern was created by Lenin, connecting socialist parties around the globe with Soviet Russia, to give guidance and as much help as possible, to incite a world revolution. This was personally headed by Lenin, overseeing all aspects of its operation. Unlike Stalin, Lenin was concerned with bringing the rest of the world into socialist power, to then industrialize Russia with Western Europe’s industrialized resources. This was not realized, though, since the world revolution never came. Eventually, Lenin’s focus turned slightly inward to try to bring Soviet Russia up on to its feet, economically speaking. Even to his deathbed, Lenin’s focus was on the world, to bring the socialist world revolution to a reality.
During the years after the First World War, Adolf Hitler had already formed the concrete values of his political beliefs. Even in his adolescence, prior to WWI, young Hitler was learning politics of old Austria. Present were three major political parties, the Social Democrats, the Christian Socialists and the Pan-German Nationalists. After a single encounter with the Social Democrats, Hitler despised the party, their political beliefs and the personally the people in the party. For him, Austria had only one saving grace, that the Germans would once again rise and take over Austria, letting what he called the Master Race rule with absolutism. Most detested of the Social Democrats were their hostile attitude towards the struggle for the preservation of what Hitler called “Germanism” and what he considered to be the disgraceful courting of other Social Democrats from other nations, especially Slavic Social Democrats. Even now, prior to WWI, prior to any Social Democratic revolution, Hitler held Marxism in contempt and hatred. Although, Hitler did learn some valuable political lessons from the Social Democrats, they had three valuable tools used to control people: They knew how to create a mass movement, without which any political party was useless; they had learned the art of propaganda among the masses; and, finally, they knew the value of using what he called “spiritual and physical terror.” Seeing this, Hitler aligned himself with the Pan-German Nationalist Party, who at the time were engaged in a last ditch effort for German supremacy in that (Austria) multinational empire. In this political party, Hitler found the basic beliefs of Georg Ritter von Schoenerer (the party’s founder and leader), who’s political stance embraced a basic program of violent nationalism, anti-Semitism, anti-socialism and union with Germany. This gives us a clear window into the basis for the political ideals for the basic foundation of Hitler’s foreign policy with Soviet Russia after his (and his party’s) rise to power over German in 1933.
The basic belief of anti-Semitism and hatred towards Socialism [Marxism], gives through to Hitler’s dealings with the Soviet leadership. Also, this proves conflict with the Soviet Comintern’s offices and practices in pre-Nazi Germany and Nazi controlled Germany. Although these beliefs were founded solidly in Hitler’s political actions, he also understood the power and destructive capabilities of the Red Army if provoked into war. This would shape his pre-war diplomacy with Stalin and Soviet Russia.
Seething over the strict control over Germany after the defeat had at the end of World War I, Hitler set forth to create a military state that would give Nazi Germany the power and economy to pull the country from the ruins of economic despair; moreover, his country would have the ability to reclaim the land lost from the Treaty of Versailles Hitler’s Germany had begun purchasing raw materials from Soviet Russia shortly after the rise to power of the Nazi party in 1933, material needed to rebuild their still war torn country and begin the reconstruction of their once mighty military. These economic relations would set the tone for further negotiations in late summer of 1939. Planning to launch an invasion of Poland by September of that year, Hitler gave the nod to begin the diplomatic process to ensure that Soviet Russia wouldn’t declare war on this act of aggression towards a country that was disputed property between the two nations. Although Hitler still despised Soviet Russia, its foundation in Marxism and its government based on Leninism, the German Chancellor understood all that could be lost by not finding a truce between Germany and Soviet Russia. With that, Hitler gave word to his Foreign Minister, Ribbentrop, to begin the formal process of diplomacy to create a non-aggression pact. This move was purely a preplanned chess move on the stage of Europe for Hitler, understanding that Nazi Germany would not survive a two front war. Furthermore, Hitler assumed that France and Britain would not strike out against Germany for invading Poland. However, his assumption proved wrong, in a few short months.
Beginning with a telegram to Moscow from Ribbentrop sent August 14 at 10:53 P.M., it directed the German ambassador to call upon Molotov and to read the long transmission to him verbatim. This was Hitler’s great bid to attempt to save his country from a possible two front war. Ribbentrop wrote “come to a historic turning point…There exist no real conflicts of interests between Germany and Russia…It has gone well with both countries previously when they were friends and badly when they were enemies.” The telegram continued, eventually suggesting and almost demanding that Ribbentrop was prepared to make a short trip to Moscow, “in the name of the Fuehrer” to shorten the amount of time used when conducting diplomacy through normal diplomatic channels. This impressed the ever suspicious Stalin, especially since in the months previous the British Foreign Secretary had not been willing to go to Moscow. Moreover, following in the telegram, Ribbentrop’s proposal reiterated that “there is no question between the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea which cannot be settled to the complete satisfaction of both countries…[specifically] the Baltic States, Poland, southeastern questions, etc.” This was carefully calculated bait set by Nazi Germany, to lure the Soviet Dictator into stated compromise of non-aggression. Also, knowing that France and Britain could not only offer those condolences, they would not offer them to the socialist country. This would prevent Stalin from forming an alliance with France and Britain and rising up against Nazi Germany. Thus, Adolf Hitler played Stalinism against Stalin and proved successful. For at 9:35 P.M. on August 21, 1939 Stalin sent his reply to Hitler:
“To The Chancellor Of The German Reich,
A. Hitler:
I thank you for the letter. I hope that the German-Soviet
non-aggression pact will bring about a decided turn for the better in the political relations between our countries.
The peoples of our countries need peaceful relations with each other. The assent of the German Government to the conclusion of a non-aggression pact provides the foundation for eliminating the political tension and for the establishment of peace and collaboration between our countries.
The Soviet Government have instructed me to inform you that they agree to Herr von Ribbentrop’s arriving in Moscow on August 23.”

The agreeing to the non-aggression pact proved that Stalinism had worked against Stalin, leaving Soviet Russia as uneasy bedfellows to Nazi Germany until the Nazi’s invasion of Russia. Had Stalin not agreed to the non-aggression pact, the war would have started much sooner for Soviet Russia; however, the war would have more then likely ended much sooner and without the United State’s physical involvement. Primarily due to the non-aggression pact, Soviet Russia continued to supply the Nazi war machine with raw materials, allowing the Germany Army to build to the size and ability it did; however, without the capital gained from those sales, Soviet Russia would have had the very difficult task of continuing rebuilding their broken army with even less capital. Had Lenin still been alive and in power then the non-aggression pact would have more then likely not been signed, thus producing a very different outcome for Soviet Russia and the rest of the western world.
The early 1930s was a time of change in foreign policy for Soviet Russia, political upheaval throughout western Europe was the norm, as Fascists and Communists battled fiercely for political control of countries. Throughout 1933 and 1934 the international organizations of communists and socialists rejected each others’ advances to join their movements to combat the rise of fascism. In 1933, Nazi Germany withdrew from the League of Nations, signaling a change in Germany’s foreign policy. Hitler also backed Mussolini’s invasion of Ethiopia in October of that year, forming the beginning of a consolidation of a Berlin-Rome axis of fascism. 1933 and 1934 were turning points in Soviet foreign diplomacy. In November of 1933 Litvinov traveled to Washington to reach an agreement with the Roosevelt administration to recognize the Soviet Union as a nation; moreover, this was the year that a resolution passed in the Politburo in favor of the policy of collective security. Collective security embodied the ideals of the League of Nations, those nations would act in concert against an aggressor. This, followed by the Soviet Union’s acceptance to the League of Nations, brought about a new era to Soviet foreign diplomacy. Soviet Russia signed a pact of peace with France on May 2, 1935, which was quickly followed by a treaty with Czechoslovakia. The major turn of ideals is that previous to these steps taken, Soviet Russia had denounced those nations recently before these agreements had been signed. The treaty with France and Czechoslovakia were in direct response to the growing fascist nation of Nazi Germany, although this was merely a hollow shell, militarily worthless. France’s acceptance into the pact had no military obligations to Soviet Russia; moreover, the Soviet Union, who was to be called upon to militarily aid France and Czechoslovakia if attacked by an aggressor nation, had no common boarders with either country. Thus, the reality of the treaty is that it could not be fulfilled if acted upon. During the years that followed, up till the non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union slowly began aligning with the nations that supported the Versailles treaty, Britain and France, moving away from Germany and Italy (who wanted to over throw the treaty).
Stalin, in the matters of diplomacy with Western capitalist powers shifted away from the directives the Comintern used, pulling a political rift between the Soviet government and the Soviet organization devised to lead the world to a Marxist revolution. This was very Stalinist in nature due to the idea that Stalin was a nationalist, in ward focused trying to solve Soviet Russia’s economic distress; where as, Lenin were outwardly focused. Lenin held deep faith in the Comintern, longing for the world revolution that would bring Socialism to all of the Western world and the end to Russia’s economic hardships. This would argue that Lenin (if had been alive) would have entered into a treaty with France, nor would they have aligned themselves with their capitalist “foes” in Western Europe.
With the budding success of fascism throughout Europe during the 1930s, Soviet Russia found its self responsible for keeping the Communist-arch-rival from gaining power throughout Europe. The defeat of the Spanish Republic and the triumph of Franco’s own version of fascism in 1939, gave Stalin a political wake-up call, especially in regards to diplomacy used with the fascist nation Germany. Loosing Spain to fascism, after giving military aid and sending advisor, left the USSR wedged in a political hot zone. Caught between a hostile Germany, Japan and the Western capitalist countries who did not trust Soviet Russia, Stalin was left with little choice but to agree to the non-aggression pact when it was proposed later in that year. Stalin had hoped that by signing an agreement with Germany, Hitler would be able to lay to rest the tension between Soviet Russia and Imperialist Japan. Stalin’s foreign policy goal during this time was based far more on the power politics of nations vying for advantage in a very chaotic Europe then continuing on Lenin’s dream of revolutionary expansion. Stalin’s main purpose was to preserve the USSR and enhance its prestige, power and influence. This was put to the test in 1936 with the signing of an agreement between Italy and Japan, effectively forming an anti-Comintern, anti-Soviet alliance.
Litvinov was replaced by Stalin as foreign commissar by Molotov, seemingly allowing the change necessary to release Russia from the policy of collective security to reach an agreement with Hitler’s Germany. Allowing this change gave way to the non-aggression pact on August 23rd of that year. Although this pact stunned the world as well as Politburo members, Stalin informed them that he “[knew] what Hitler’s up to…He thinks he’s outsmarted me, but actually it’s I who have tricked him.” Stating that Soviet Russia would be able to stay neutral and continue to build their military for the impending war. Although there was a time delay between the non-aggression pact and the on vent of war between Soviet Russia and Germany, Stalin did not use this time as well as he could. By allying with Germany in 1939, Stalin allowed Hitler’s army to nearly destroy the Western European power’s chance at initially surviving the war, giving the Nazi’s the opportunity to launch a devastating one-front war against the Soviet Union. Although there was time to build for a war against Germany, Stalin’s pact with Germany ultimately nearly doomed the struggling Socialist power. The pact that was thought to save Soviet Russia, nearly doomed her.
Lenin’s differing views of foreign diplomacy from Stalin, could have kept Soviet Russia out of the non-aggression pact, leaving them to enter into a war-time alliance with the Western European Capitalist nations in order to quickly destroy Nazi Germany. This could have left a English-French-Russian coalition on better footing entering the war against Nazi Germany, a coalition which may have had the ability to stop Hitler in the early years of World War II.
Vladimir Lenin’s great dream was that Western Europe’s proletariat would rise and over throw their governments shortly after seeing the success of a Socialist revolution in Russia. Nearly to the every day until the day he died, Lenin believed that day could and would bring the long awaited Socialist revolution; however, this of course did not happen. To help promote world revolution, Lenin established and oversaw the creation of the Comintern, which was the world extension of Lenin-Marxism. Created in 1919, this began the dual policy of pushing for world revolution, but also courting capitalist society for the goods and materials needed to rebuild war ravaged Russia. Soviet Russia also desperately tried to make ties with the governments of Britain and France, to have at least on of those counties on the side Soviet Russia in terms of trade. This was also an attempt to keep the two countries from forming an anti-Soviet pact, denying Russia the material and capital so desperately needed to rebuild the country and economy ravaged by a revolution and civil war.
Despite the strange and strained relations with France following the first World War and Russia’s Civil War, Lenin’s foreign policy would have differed fairly widely from Stalin’s; furthermore, Lenin’s foreign policy could have put Soviet Russia in the second war against Germany, allied with France and Britain far sooner then what happened under Stalin. Lenin may have seen the dramatic rise of fascism as a direct threat to Marxism, a far greater threat then capitalism. Thus, Lenin could have taken a few different steps. Firstly, the military support to Spain during the fascist revolution could have been far greater, defeating the fascist rebels, laying way for a new nation ruled by Leninism-Marxism. Also, following the probably success in Spain, Lenin may have seen Nazi Germany in the same light that France and Britain did. Thus, opposing the proposals by Hitler and his foreign ministers, Lenin could have seized the opportunity to stand united with France and Britain against Nazi Germany.
Stalinism and Stalin’s acceptance of the non-aggression pact was another in a series of events in Europe that helped give Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany an edge to wage war with. The non-aggression pact also gave Hitler the chance to begin his war of aggression across Europe as a single front war, giving Nazi Germany the ability to claim land and continue the buildup of its military for the inevitable two front war that was to come. Had Lenin still been alive, he may not have signed in accordance with Nazi Germany to the non-aggression pact, but he may have taken sides with England and France. This may have drastically changed the course of events through the beginning of World War II and may have drastically altered the history of Europe.

Bibliography
Books

Bullock, Alan L. Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives. New York. Knopf Publishing
Group, 1995.
Conquest, Robert. Stalin: Breaker of Nations. New York. Viking Penguin, 1993.
Erickson, John. The Road To Stalingrad: Stalin’s War with Germany, Vol1. New York.
Sterling Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2002.
Grigorsuny, Ronald. The Soviet Experiment: Russia, The USSR, and the Successor
States. New York. Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 1998.
Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Trans. Ralph Manheim. New York. Houghton Mifflin
Company, 1971.
McCauley, Martin. Stalin and Stalinism. New York. Pearson Education, 1995.
Pauley, Bruce F. Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini: Totalitarianism in the Twentieth
Century. New York. Davidson, Harlan Incorporated, 2003.
Radzinsky, Edvard. Stalin. New York. Anchor Books, 1997
Shirer, William L. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. New York. Touchstone, 1960.

.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[78RATS 0]

Dude that is totally plagiarized from my paper.

Rat for Life - Fly till I die
When them stupid ass bitches ask why

[racer42 0]

Good paper. You make some interesting points contrasting the philosophical differences between Stalin and Lenin. Lenin despised Stalin. You should read what Trotsky wrote about Stalin.....I mean before the ice pick in the head thing..

L.A.S.T. #24
Co-Founder Biscuit Brothers Freefly Team
Electric Toaster #3
Co-Founder Team Non Sequitor
Co-Founder Team Happy Sock

[AggieDave 6]

I have read what Trotsky wrote, not exactly a Stalinist...

All the inner politics in the upper group of the Soviets is very interesting.

Actually, it'd make a great comedy, especially if it was played by midgets

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."