SSP Essay Edited - The view on Stalin both nationally and internationally. PDF

Preview

Summary

The view on Stalin both nationally and internationally....

Description

Candidate no: 676811 Word Count: 1617 (minus the bibliography)

How is Stalin Remembered in Different Aspects of the World? The topic of Stalin has remained a great subject of controversy in the discussion of historical leaders through the years. For many, he is seen as nothing more but a symbolic representation of the tyranny behind the utopian ideals of Bolshevik Communism. However for some, he is seen as nothing more but a great revolutionary. In understanding these contrasting views, an in-depth analysis will be performed surrounding the reception he receives in particular areas of the world. Stalin’s Georgian heritage, his involvement in the Cold War and deteriorating relations with the West has ultimately led to the particular analysis of Russian, American and Georgian sentiments to be explored through this essay. Ultimately, the remembrance of Stalin in these countries will portray how the lasting effects of a totalitarian system of governance has had upon public opinion. Review of Literature Stalin has remained a greatly celebrated symbol of freedom by many of the older demographic in Russia. Being described as a “self-creation” (Sebag Montefiore, 2012), he expertly manifested himself into the utopian leader of which many align him to. Remembering Stalin in Russia brings about an array of mixed reactions. For many, choosing to remain oblivious towards the controversy engulfing the Soviet past (Khazanov, 2008) has become a coping mechanism. Rather being a sentiment stemmed from ignorance, the indifference the Russian public display at his mention has become an inherent part of Putin Russia (Khazanov, 2008). It is important to understand as to why Stalin has left such a lasting effect upon the Russian public. In explaining the view of the traumatised (Hochschild, 2003), the lengths to which were taken in leading to this trauma is interesting enough in its study. Many Gulag survivors (forced labourers) were shunned and cast astray from their loved ones, writing:

“Even our children didn't feel sorry for us Even our wives did not want us.” (Applebaum, 2002). So how exactly is Stalin received in Russia? Many view him as a victor, which is refuted by sociologists coming to the unanimous agreement of these perceptions being founded on the myths largely consumed by the older generations (Pipiya, 2019). Largely, there is a feeling of disassociation. The remembrance of Stalin reopens wounds left behind by the Gulags and

other repressive agencies (Khazanov, 2008), leaving them open and vulnerable to scrutiny. Repentance and accountability are themes vaguely explored by the Russian public regarding the atrocities brought about by the soviet regime, choosing to remain oblivious instead. “The guilty were the socio‐ political system and the communist rulers, never oneself” (S. Kon, 1993). To answer the above question, I maintain the thought that Stalin is indeed a greatly celebrated figure. However, his celebratory status has resulted in the sacrifice of collective harmony. The past - particularly upon the remembrance of Stalin - is something Russians will continually run away from. This raises the question is Stalin’s celebrated legacy, more so a long-forgotten myth? Following 20 years of post-socialist transition, 83% of Georgians agree that democracy is a more so preferred political system to be in (CRRC 2012). Which begs the question, why do Georgians prefer a system of democracy when it was all Stalin was against? The remembrance of Stalin in Georgia should provoke a feeling of nostalgia. It should promote a nationalistic sense of pride in the nation. But it doesn’t. The younger demographic in Georgia are shown to be least influenced by the socialisation attempts at glorifying Stalin (Gugushvili and Kabachnik, 2014), with studies showing positive attitudes towards Stalin are highest amongst those born before 1925 and lowest for those born after 1966 - interestingly enough during Gorbachev’s perestroika and glasnost epochs (Reisinger et al., 1994). It can thus be assumed that the indoctrination of Stalin’s legacy has led to the older generation’s remembrance of Stalin as being a “strong leader” (Hahn and Logvinenko, 2008) and the absence of such attempts, leading to the younger demographic’s indifference. To decipher true American sentiment towards Stalin, one must take note of the heavy history associated with the USSR’s and US’ former friendship. The cold war was undoubtedly an era which induced sentiments of insecurity within the world leaders. Studies conducted by the AIPO found 60% (Wyllie, Strunk and Cantril, 1951) of American citizens agreeing the US was too soft on its policy toward Russia post World War II (Hupp, 2009). This statistic indefinitely shows American perception of Russia remaining “unchanged, unchanging, and unchangeable” (Cohen, 1986). Those that were to carry the Kremlin post Stalin’s death were simply acknowledged as copies of Stalin, but “in Parisian suit(s)” (Cohen, 1986). The remembrance of Stalin can be thus understood as heavily laden with historic tensions, with events such as the Cold War, the arms race and the USSR’s plans of expansion ultimately portraying “cruel, merciless nature Stalin possessed” (Hupp,2009).

Media Analysis In understanding how Stalin is perceived in different areas of the world, the concentration of public opinion was applied as a criterion. Propaganda campaigns, news articles, speeches and the study of social media were used as evidences in understanding the differing perceptions the Russian, Georgian and American public have manifested through the years prior and post Stalin’s demise. It is important to acknowledge the many factors to which may act as influences on public perception of Stalin. Being a high political figure, sentiments of both pride and resentment lay heavy in association with his leadership. In deciphering true Russian sentiment, it was important for myself to find evidences which show the somewhat confusion which lay heavily embedded in the Russian public upon the remembrance of Stalin. Vkontakte (VK), a popular analogue of Facebook, is a heavily used social media platform in Russia. The filtration of blogs dedicated to Stalin on the VK website showed a similar theme of pages using the name “Stalin” as a means of drawing an audience for their own prerogative desires. This can particularly be seen when entering “Great Stalin” [1] as a search, which merely opens up a page promoting the owner’s YouTube content and other gaming related material. In furthering my search, I also found terms associated with Stalin, such as “Gulag” also being used to draw user attention. Interestingly, there seems to be a common theme within these VK groups which indorse the use of the term “Stalin” as a means of conveying their own political agenda. The VK group “The Gulag” [2] upon search, shows high resentment towards Putin Russia whereas its neighbouring group “Joseph Stalin” [3] does nothing but share propaganda material in favour of Stalinist Russia. Indeed, upon the thematic analysis of these blogs there is a common theme of confusion between these differing views. The reoccurring theme of naivety and somewhat indifference expressed by the typically younger demographic in Russia, may possibly be linked to the owner of the “Great Stalin” page. Gaming can be assumed to belong to a younger individual’s topics of interest, thus the somewhat flippant use of Stalin as a means of generating an audience by the owner. The idea of the memory of Stalinism commonly being divided by two agents - “Stalinist” and “anti-Stalinist” (Adler, 1993, 2012; Merridale, 2009; 8 Roginskij, 2009) - in Russia can be shown through the analysis of both “The Gulag” and “Joseph Stalin” holding polarising views of Stalin’s so-proclaimed legacy. Ultimately, the remembrance of Stalin in Russia can merely just be seen to be driven by a contestation of political agendas.

Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-georgia-stalin/in-stalins-native-georgia-sovietdictator-still-revered-by-some-idUSKBN1441LU It can be seen however, that Georgian nationalistic pride is still something which is strongly associated upon the remembrance of Stalin. The thematic analysis of this image portrays the nostalgia many Georgians have in regard to Stalin and his origins. However, the removal of the Stalin memorial from his Georgian hometown, Gori, shows there to be a contestation between the Georgian nationals and the current government wanting to forget particular aspects of the past (BBC, 2010)[4]. In analysing this image and the news article, the collision of particular themes such as pride and indifference can also be seen coming into play in Georgia. Although particular groups wanting to hold on to the memory of Stalin remain strong, the imminent force of the Georgian government wanting to forget this aspect of their past too, remain strong.

Source: https://lageneralista.com/youve-been-trumped-the-perils-of-sociological-propaganda/

Upon performing a thematic analysis on American impression of Stalin, the remembrance of former Soviet and US relations is key in understanding the origins of these themes. The image above is a propaganda campaign released by the US government, in heights of the “Red Scare”. Hostility, resentment and fear were key motifs induced in the American public in association with the USSR and Stalin. Such themes can be seen in President Truman’s speech “A Fateful Hour” [5] in response to Soviet expansion whereby he declares war on the Soviet Union. Ultimately, the remembrance of Stalin in America is fuelled by nothing but a difference in ideologies.

Conclusion In concluding this project, it is important to understand that Stalin is a figure that will continue to rise mixed sentiments upon the remembrance of his character. The “Stalinist” narratives that were found, were typically amongst the older demographic particularly residing in Georgia and Russia. It can be assumed that individuals are more so in favour of Stalin’s memory, rather than his actions. So how is Stalin remembered exactly? To answer, he is remembered through a contestation of views driven by political agendas. He is viewed through the lenses of the indoctrination both by his campaign, and the West’s. To form a unified narrative regarding his legacy is somewhat impossible however, the unanimous agreement can be made that he has indeed left his mark in history and will continue doing so.

Bibliography: Anne Applebaum, “After the Gulag”, The New York Review of Books, October 24 (2002), p.40. Adler N (1993) Victims of Soviet Terror: The Story of the Memorial Movement. Westport, Conn: Praeger. 23 Adler N (2012) Reconciliation with – or rehabilitation of – the Soviet past? Memory Studies 5(3): 327–338. BBC News. 2019. Why So Many Russians Like Dictator Stalin. [online] Available at: [Accessed 1 May 2020]. Cohen, S., 1986. America's Russia: Can the Soviet Union change?. Socialism and Democracy, 2(2), pp.5-16. CRRC (Caucasus Research Resource Centers). 2012. “Caucasus Barometer.” Tbilisi: Caucasus Research Resource Centers. http://www.crrccenters.org/caucasusbarometer/. [Google Scholar] Gugushvili, A. and Kabachnik, P., 2014. Stalin is dead, long live Stalin? Testing socialization, structural, ideological, nationalist, and gender hypotheses. Post-Soviet Affairs, 31(1), pp.1-36. Hahn, Jeffrey W., and IgorLogvinenko. 2008. “Generational Differences in Russian Attitudes Towards Democracy and the Economy.” Europe-Asia Studies60 (8): 1345– 1369. 10.1080/09668130802292168. Hochschild, A., 2003. The Unquiet Ghost. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Hupp, K., 2009. “Uncle Joe”: What Americans Thought Of Joseph Stalin Before And After World War II. [online] Etd.ohiolink.edu. Available at: [Accessed 1 May 2020]. Igor S. Kon, “Identity Crisis and Postcommunist Psychology”, Symbolic Interaction, 16/4 (1993), p.399. Khazanov, A., 2008. Whom to Mourn and Whom to Forget? (Re)constructing Collective Memory in Contemporary Russia. Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, 9(2-3), pp.293-310. Merridale C (2009) Haunted by Stalin’s Ghost. History Today 59(9): 32–38. Reisinger, William M., Arthur H.Miller, Vicki L.Hesli, and KristenHill Maher. 1994. “Political Values in Russia, Ukraine and Lithuania: Sources and Implications for Democracy.” British Journal of Political Science24 (2): 183– 223. 10.1017/S0007123400009789. Roginskij A (2009) Fragmented memory. Stalin and Stalinism in present-day Russia. Osteuropa Web Special: 1–7.

Sebag Montefiore, S., 2012. The Court Of The Red Tsar. London: Phoenix, p.3. Wyllie, I., Strunk, M. and Cantril, H., 1951. Public Opinion, 1935-1946. The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 38(1), p.139....