Destalinization
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?
Joseph Stalin ruled the USSR from 1929 until his death in 1953. His rule was one
of tyranny, and great change from the society that his predecessor, Lenin, had
envisioned (Seton, 34). Stalin put into effect two self proclaimed
"five-year plans" over the course of his rule. Both were very similar
in that they were intended to improve production in the nation. The first of
these plans began collectivization, in which harvests and industrial products
were seized by the government and distributed as needed. The government
eliminated most private businesses and the state became the leader in commerce.
Stalin also initiated a process called "Russification". (Great Events,
119)"
Through this program, he ruled the minority nations of the USSR such as
Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan more strictly. This policy of expansion also helped
Stalin seize a large portion of Poland, and it was done under the guise that it
was to "enrich the nation." Stalin established a secret police force
which was unyielding and went about it's business with an iron fist, bringing
down dissenters, revolutionaries, and those that cheated in collectivization.
Much of Stalin's effectiveness can probably be contributed to this police force;
because of their keenness in apprehending "criminals," Stalin went
generally unopposed and he could carry out his policies which no one liked, but
everyone endured. Anti-Semitism was abundant and encouraged at this time.
Stalin's entrance into WWII left the Soviet Union, although victorious, in
shambles. These factors all led to Stalin becoming an unpopular leader over his
powerless people.
There were several effects of Stalin's reign that shaped the political views of
future leaders. Communism grew unpopular among the lay-people because Stalin
used the system, not to benefit them, but to benefit the state and his reign.
The collectivization did improve the economy, but it killed many people in the
process. Farmers who depended on their crops not just for income, but also for
food, died, as did those who tried to hide some of their crops from government
collectors. Industrialization was rapid and many products came off the
assembly-line...all of which went to the State for distribution. All of this
domestic reform by Stalin left his army unprepared because of their other
concentrations. While they should have been preparing for World War II, the
soldiers were sent around the USSR to erect statues and paraphernalia of Stalin
(Great Events, 121). Several cities and monuments were named after the leader,
also causing problems for military units as stations and fortified cities lost
their names and confused soldiers. These are probably major reasons for the
heavy amount of casualties suffered by the Russians in the war. It enraged the
people that their leader left them so unprepared, and deepened their already
great hatred of Joseph Stalin. Under this dictator, the USSR fell behind in
worldwide economics, politics, and technologies-their status as a world power
was declining and a new leader was to be welcomed.
A struggle for power ensued almost immediately following the death of Stalin in
1953. Cries came from the people for reform, but they were quiet cries because
nobody knew if the next leader would just continue Stalin's no-opposition
policies. Also the secret police force, though without their master, still had
power and still worked to satisfy Stalin's wishes (Rutherford, 16). Before
dying, Stalin held one of several "great purges" in which he
eliminated or imprisoned anyone who could possibly threaten his power-
especially those who were gaining power in his own Communist Party (Great
Events, 121). This led to confusion as to who actually held leadership, as there
was no one truly ranked in a position to take over. Finally, a collective
leadership was established in the Communist Party which was the majority party
at the time. Several men ruled together and Georgi Malenkov emerged as the
leader of this group. He named himself premier, a position just short of
dictator, while a man named Nikita Khrushchev emerged as the leader of the
Communist Party. Malenkov told the Russians that he would undo many of the
changes that Stalin had made, but his reforms were extremely slow and
ineffective. Khrushchev built support and soon gained enough power to blackmail
Malenkov into resigning in 1955. Khrushchev finally became premier in 1958 and
remained the Party leader, giving him almost total control over the nation.
Khrushchev worked hard to be agreeable with the majority of the people he ruled.
He went against many of Stalin's policies and gave the people a much greater
sense of freedom. There was free political discussion, a standard 40 hour work
week where people were free to change jobs, better government planning of
production, and eased travel restrictions over the "Iron Curtain."
Because he went away from Stalin's collectivization, industry and farm
production suffered, and most of the nation's wheat was purchased from the West;
the only counteraction to this was a happier constituency. Khrushchev
established a policy of "peaceful co-existence" with the West in 1956
(Hirschfeld, 38-39). It helped the war-battered nation avoid further war with
the West and it helped the nation to keep up with world technology. Stalin
wanted to spread Communism where ever he could and however he could. Khrushchev,
too, wanted to spread the political system, but he did it through words, and
encouraged riots in other nations. These differences, along with a win in the
space race, gave Khrushchev a popular image with the common people; but he was
scorned by the neo-Stalinists and those who held a lot of power in the Communist
Party.
Probably the most notable achievement of Khrushchev was his process of "Destalinization."
A political ploy to erase the past and ease the minds of those who suffered
under the dictator. Khrushchev worked to denounce his former leader's doings and
clean up the image of the nation on a worldwide scale. It is interesting to note
though that Khrushchev worked with Stalin since nearly the time when Stalin took
power at the uprisal of the modern Communist Party. He never made his newly
found hatred for the man obvious while Stalin was in office, perhaps to protect
himself, and perhaps to keep him rising through the ranks of the party. Only
after Stalin's death did Khrushchev express his views on the leader's tyranny.
The cities which were once named in honor of Stalin were given new names or
returned to their old names (ex. Stalingrad returned to Volgograd) (Rutherford,
80). The statues and pictures of Stalin which were erected were destroyed, and
letters were sent to families of those killed in battle which criticized
Stalin's weak leadership during the time of war. Perhaps the most notable
example of Destalinazation was a clandestine speech that Khrushchev gave to top
officials of the Communist Party where he denounced Stalin and criticized the
dictator and those who agreed with his views which murdered so many Russian
citizens. The speech was supposedly kept a secret so that the Capitalist media
would not receive word of it and gain an edge over the Communists if they knew
of the strife that was occurring within the party. Stalin's grave was plundered
and vandalized during this process, and Khrushchev gained approval from the
West. It had a negative effect on Communism as a whole in that denouncing Stalin
was basically denouncing Communism from its roots. Revolts broke out against the
Communist governments in Poland and Hungary, and the USSR spent money to thwart
these disturbances which might have helped to bolster Capitalism in the nearby
areas.
Now that the scene has been established, we shall look deeper to find possible
reasons for why Destalinazation started and the impact that it had on Khrushchev
and the nation. Joseph Stalin was probably one of the smartest leaders in
keeping his people under an iron fist. Louis the XIV had the same effect, but he
did it in a much more subtle way, quelling the nobility while serving the
lay-people. It would have been tough for anyone to rise to power while Stalin
was ruling because the secret police would have caught on to them so quickly and
had them "removed." The reason's his policies failed may have been the
rapidness of the instillation of Communism on the people. They had been under
Czarist rule for so long, when all of the sudden Lenin seized power, and soon
after, Stalin gained that power. The drastic differences in the way the
government was run was bound to stir up conflict in the people, no matter what
the consequences may have been. Also, many of his policies couldn't get
accomplished because of what one could call weak "secondary"
leadership. Nobody could rise to a position to take charge of a certain industry
there because of Stalin's greed for absolute power. One man could not possibly
rule a nation the size and calibre of the USSR by himself-but Stalin tried. The
fact that his secret police were so well trained is probably the only reason why
he remained in power as long as he did; if they weren't, revolutionaries or even
conservative Communists could have easily striped him of power because the
people certainly were not on Stalin's side. Yes, the policy of collectivization
under Stalin boosted the economy, but the resulting loss of human life
completely outweighed this gain, leading to a loss of workers, and, if Stalin
would not have had to enter the war, a loss of production. The war brings up one
last reason for the failure of Stalin's policies which were the subject of
Destalinazation later on. Stalin could have somewhat redeemed himself with a
prepared army that would defend the nation from the Nazis and establish the USSR
as a major world power. The people might have then been able to appreciate the
role of the State under Communism. But Stalin was too busy erecting statues of
himself-gaining the image that he wanted to be remembered by. The soldiers, due
to lack of money, were unprepared, untrained, and unequipped. The only thing
that drove the German's out of the USSR was the immense mass of Russians that
Stalin had fighting, but the casualties prove the Russians were certainly not
victorious, and this probably deepened the people's hatred for the poor rule of
Stalin and their lack of representation in society.
During this time, Khrushchev kept quiet. This was most likely due to two
factors: one, he did not want to be stripped of his power and two, he wanted to
remain somewhat anonymous so that he would not be associated with Stalin's
policies when it would be time for him to possibly rise to power. He was simply
protecting his image, to both his leader, and the masses, looking favorable to
both. He was probably one of those people that nobody likes-the type that will
say whatever is necessary to boost his image at the time. If Stalin, who
Khrushchev did work closely with at times, wanted an opinion, Khrushchev
probably told Stalin that his policies were well thought out and working
advantageously to the nation, but when confronted with his views in public, one
would tend to believe that he would not be so praising, as to look good to the
masses, which hated Stalin. Once Khrushchev finally rose to power and was safe
because of Stalin's death, he started the process of Destalinizing the nation.
Even though he had been a firm believer in Communism, and probably did not care
about much of what Stalin did, Stalin had left his mark on history as an evil
man. Khrushchev most likely wanted to take advantage of his opportunity to gain
a positive image, and therefore he undid many of Stalin's reforms, he gave
people their freedoms back, and he removed the image of Stalin from cities
across the USSR. He simply told the people what they wanted to hear. It's hard
to tell how much of Khrushchev's motive for Destalinizing was for political
betterment, compensating the citizens, or national security. It could have been
that he tried to go against the policies of Stalin to open up communication with
the West and nations such as the United States. His peaceful co-existence plan
went directly against Stalin's policy of spreading Communism everywhere, any way
possible. It could have been done to make the Western nations feel an ease on
Cold War tensions, and soften their burden, giving the USSR time to catch up
technologically and rebuild after still lingering war burdens. If Khrushchev
could get the people on his side, perhaps he felt he could rule, like Stalin, in
a Louis XIV-esque style, with absolute power...only he'd be favored by the
people, and could reign easily and without distraction; but Khrushchev forgot
about one very important group of people: the ardent Communists. This group was
probably overlooked by Khrushchev while he was in the midst of his reforms. He
kept pushing them aside to better his anti-Stalinistic image. These grass-roots
Communists were then able to gain ample time and make a strong case against
Khrushchev's "soft" Communism, and they soon had him removed from
office for splitting with China and Korea. How could a man who was, although
quiet, reputed to support Stalin throughout his reign make such a turnaround in
ideas? Did Khrushchev really want to take away the image of the cruel Stalin,
who killed many people, or was he simply using it as a guise to cover us his old
image with one that would appeal to the common people of the USSR and the World
which also felt the wrath of Stalin upon them? Changing the names of cities back
to their original names and removing statues to get Stalin out of the minds of
the people may have just done the exact same thing that happened from the start
of the tyrant's reign: brought the nation into a state of shock from all of the
rapid changes which were happening once more. Khrushchev was probably interested
in making himself look like a noble leader, and a Communist that could move the
USSR competitively into the future.
Look at politics today in the United States. Candidates fill their campaigns
with promises for lower taxes or better childcare or improved road maintenance.
Yet, most of these promises go unfulfilled, or they are done half-heartedly.
They say this to improve their image and gain power or prestige. Once they hold
the office, they are required to fill the duties of that particular office and
nothing more. President Clinton promised that every school would be hooked up to
the Internet by the year 2000. Well, we're one year away, and the outlook for
that promise being fulfilled is not looking prominent. But it helped the
president win his election and it improved his image to what was a popular idea
at the time. Nikita Khrushchev saw his opportunity and jumped on it, using a
policy of Destalinazation to appeal to a people that had suffered so long under
ideals that he most likely once agreed with.
In conclusion, the process of Destalinazation may have helped ease the pain many
Russians felt because of the dictator that controlled their whole lives. The
process, however, did not and can not erase the mark Stalin left on the country.
Thought of by most as an evil and murderous man, his image is one of power,
which he wanted, but power in a negative form. Khrushchev gained the confidence
to rise up as Party leader after staying so quiet for so long, never losing
favor with a particular group of people. He turned the nation around and tried
to clean up the image of the Communist country to the rest of the world, perhaps
to gain support, and through that, catch up with world forerunners in economics
and technology. Nikita Khrushchev in my opinion was nothing more than just
another dirty old politician who conformed to whatever was popular at the time,
henceforth, improving his own image. Destalinazation was a ploy...he knew
Stalin's legacy would never be removed no matter what he did, and he was simply
trying to make himself the grander follower to the harsh dictator. History books
are filled with leaders; all make their mark in a certain way in an attempt to
be remembered. Destalinazation was Khrushchev's attempt at a favorable image for
posterity.
back up