Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Had Stalin died or been killed in the early 1920s or before, then couldn't someone such as Trotsky or Bukharin come to power in the Soviet Union after Lenin's death?
It's been many moons since my Russian History course in college, but two "first blush" thoughts on this subject - if memory serves me well enough:
1) If there was no Stalin, there was still Lenin that preceded Stalin. I don't think Lenin was going to be all that amiable to the West and/or capitalism, the primary reason he isn't as known for his animosity is happened to die relatively young so avoided being around long enough to get as much a bad rap as Stalin. However, the mindset that Lenin approached the world and brought him to power through the Revolution wasn't one that I think was going to, again, be agreeable to the West.
As many already said here, it was not about Lenin or Stalin but ideology that Russia pursued from the 1917 on. It was hostile to capital/money - with other words things the West has been built upon.
Quote:
2) The mindset and culture that set the stage of distrust of the West far preceded Stalin or even Lenin. My memory of my history course really brings Russia back to around 998 AD and too many invasions of Russia. The culture of distrust that eventually led to the czars
It was not so much about Russia being "invaded by the West" but about the Roman Church not being happy that Russia was not subdued under Catholicism. That being said, Russia back in those days has been attacked even more from the "East" - from Asia, and that's what led to centralized government of the country, since the decentralized Russia became an easy target for those invasions.
From the 1700ies on however, when the West was already not all about the Roman Church, Russia became the integral part of the West. Family ties of the Russian monarchy and Russian culture (literature, music, painting, philosophy) of that period attest to that.
If you assume Stalin had lost the power struggle after the death of Lenin in 1924 and the USSR had taken a course more along the lines of the New Economic Plan backed by Lenin and Trotsky one wouldn't have had (1) the Rapid industrialization of the 3 Five Year Plans, (2) Forced collectivization of agriculture and (3) The rapid devlopment of the technical basis for what would become the new weapons that won the war. Russia might have been a huge but weak version of Poland or Yugoslavia and might have been easy pickings for the German Reich.
^
This.
If it were not for Stalin and his rapid industrialization, Russia would have ultimately lost the WWII.
Had Stalin died or been killed in the early 1920s or before, then couldn't someone such as Trotsky or Bukharin come to power in the Soviet Union after Lenin's death?
There is an old Joke:
Stalin is standing atop Lenin's tomb facing a millions of Soviet citizens amassed in Red Square.
Comrades, I have great news. I have received a letter from Comrade Trotsky.
"Comrade Stalin,
"You were right, I was wrong, you're Lenin's true heir to the throne. I should apologize."
The crowd goes wild because this reconcile between Stalin and Trotsky is a momentous occasion for socialist throughout the world.
But in the midst of a crowd and little tailor can be heard saying, Comrade Stalin, I don't think that you read Comrade Trotsky's letter with the full and true measure of his sentiments.
To this Stalin replied, "Well Comrade Tailor come up and let us here the voice of socialist worker read Comrade's Trotsky's letter." The crowd goes cheers as never before.
The little tailor climbs the steps of Lenin's Tomb and faces the multitude assembled in Red Square.
"Comrade Stalin, "You were right? I was wrong? You're Lenin's true heir to the throne? I should apologize?"
Stalin is standing atop Lenin's tomb facing a millions of Soviet citizens amassed in Red Square.
Comrades, I have great news. I have received a letter from Comrade Trotsky.
"Comrade Stalin,
"You were right, I was wrong, you're Lenin's true heir to the throne. I should apologize."
The crowd goes wild because this reconcile between Stalin and Trotsky is a momentous occasion for socialist throughout the world.
But in the midst of a crowd and little tailor can be heard saying, Comrade Stalin, I don't think that you read Comrade Trotsky's letter with the full and true measure of his sentiments.
To this Stalin replied, "Well Comrade Tailor come up and let us here the voice of socialist worker read Comrade's Trotsky's letter." The crowd goes cheers as never before.
The little tailor climbs the steps of Lenin's Tomb and faces the multitude assembled in Red Square.
"Comrade Stalin, "You were right? I was wrong? You're Lenin's true heir to the throne? I should apologize?"
Pardon my ignorance, but I don't quite get this joke.
Somebody else would have carried out essentially the same policy. Stalin was the Chairman of the Supreme Soviet, and he remained in office only as long as he carried out their policy. Lavrenti Beria is said to have been the brutal thug who goaded Stalin to be as bad as he was.
I can't find the quote, but as I recall, Beria said something like "You have to kill a few million every once in a while, to let them know you really mean it." Beria claims to have murdered Stalin, who presumably was savvy enough to fear Beria.
If everything were known, Beria would probably turn out to be the most evil human being in the 20th century. Stalin didn't methodically kill people, he just negligently let them die.
If there had been no Stalin and the USSR had a leader that was good friends with the west after WWII do you think it would still have been a cold war. I mean if the USA and USSR stayed good friends after WWII what would history have been like ? Do you think it would have been much different ? Ron.
It would not have been different.
The West was not opposed to Stalin as an individual, the West has proven they do not care much about mass executions and arrests, so as long as the country sides with the West it is all good.
The West opposed the ideology, more specifically, the Russian Revolution and impact after it probably scared the heck out of businesses and the wealthy (thus the gov's) in the West (which I contribute to the rapid rise of workers' rights).
As long as this ideology existed, the USSR was going to be an enemy no matter what. The area itself, the Russia Empire, was always a target of Western aggression of some form for centuries, some religious based, some based on other reasons, but it almost seems a cultural trait for there to be friction among people/governments who occupy the area of the Russian Empire and the West. Even before the Russian Empire or Russia itself, the Byzantines were a constant target of Western aggression; it is like the Western Church has it out for anything Eastern Orthodox, and this cultural trait has influenced every other area of western society.
If there had been no Stalin and the USSR had a leader that was good friends with the west after WWII do you think it would still have been a cold war. I mean if the USA and USSR stayed good friends after WWII what would history have been like ? Do you think it would have been much different ? Ron.
Maybe things might have been slightly better without Stalin. But I think as others have said, there was still the problem of communism vs. capitalism to be worked out. Not to mention the age old battle for spheres of influence between great powers. Still going on today.
But there is another interesting question. If there was no Stalin - would a different Soviet leader agreed to the Nazi-Soviet Pact?
Maybe a different Soviet leader, instead of the Nazi-Soviet Pact would have backed up the British and French guarantee to Poland. Between the Soviets, France, Britain and Poland maybe Hitler would have backed down. Maybe these four nations and others could have formed an alliance and Nazi Germany could have been contained and there would have been no World War 2. Who knows?
Pardon my ignorance, but I don't quite get this joke.
The quesiton marks; Stalin reaidng the letter did not emphasize the statements as questions, but as an admission. The joke is showing the slight spin on things in Stalin's mind/Soviet gov; it was the truth, but not quite the truth depending how a person chooses to view it and convey the information.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What if no Stalin ??
