Russia and Eastern Europe after Lenin - Essay Example

Stalinism, Communism and Europe Introduction The emphatic influence of capitalism was a true but concealed affair for the socialist Russia across the World Wars as the economic democracy became a need for the community to develop rapidly. It was then Joseph Stalin merged the Marxist and Leninist views to inflict rapid changes in the development of Russia by forming the Russian state of Soviet Union and promoted industrial development, unified socialism and collectivisation of farming labour for the progress of Russian economy. He was considered to be an autocratic totalitarian administrator who used terror strategies to suppress the religious and feudal powers that resisted the socialist thoughts. Post war development in Russia under Stalinism influenced the economically and strategically forward European nations which had followed the system of Stalinism for a long time until the result of World War II brought drastic changes in the political and economic definitions across the world. This essay focuses on the development and decline of Stalinism in different countries across Central and Eastern Europe during the post-war period. Emergence of Stalinism During the time of developmental changes in Russia, Leninist followers identified the ratification possibilities of the state to approve the powers of capital investors over the working class of the country. Revolutionary leaders of Russia then framed actions and campaigns to direct the state administration to communism. The ideal principle of the movements of Leninists was the preference of revolution to evolution and social democracy to communism. However, the two leaders were guided by more less similar principle and were highly regarded as the leaders of the masses. According Foster (2007), both Lenin and Stalin were men of action and thought who have shown the example of coordination of theories and practices required for the realisation of daily needs of the masses of the country for achieving the desired outlook of socialism. By the end of Leninist era, Stalin emerged as a prime figure in the Republic of Russia with his principles of centralized administration and trust in the employment of terror for power. The Stalinist invasion of Europe started with the agreement of Germany giving away the states of Baltic and part of Nazi dominant part of Poland to Russia (Western Civilization, 1997). Stalin’s foremost political identity was reflected by his distrust for the Western Europeans and the immediate lenience he showed to the supporting nations that stood along with his interest. The time of Churchill posed crucial protest to the regime of Stalin in the progress of socialism towards West Europe. The initially well found treaty between Germany and Russia was violated by Hitler in 1941 and resultant war encouraged the strength of Soviet Union in Bulgaria and Romania. Hitler’s treacherous attempt to attack Russia eventually turned Stalin a violent strategist against the proportions of any treaty and captured factories and infrastructure of Hungary, Romania and Poland. His thought was that a permanent economic failure would stabilize the power of the USSR in the captured regions in the Eastern Europe. As Krammer (n.d) thinks, Stalin was of the view that establishment of power over the East European countries could give him a platform to impose his socialist power to West European countries like France and Italy. For a boosting effort in the political perspective, Stalin also confirmed the administrative authorities to the European followers by ascending them to power. The political pressure as well as the economic dominance of Stalinism in the Eastern provinces of Europe eventually turned countries almost all countries to the side of socialism. Absolute political subordination of countries like Bulgaria, Poland, East Germany and Hungary gave Stalin enough room for the political transformation of the European region that gradually spread to Central Europe. The centrally administrated system of socialist party of the USSR was headed from Moscow to monitor the European interest in the party. During the World War II, the Russian involvement in the war preparation and the stabilization of backup material was greatly indebted to the principles of Stalinism. With powerful protest of Germany in alliance with the Axis forces comprising Italy intertwined the political tensions with economic instability in the Central European provinces. A fear of the American dominance and the seizure of political stronghold over the region by external forces effectively attracted small countries towards the Soviet Union’s support. By utilizing the possibilities of the war, Stalin expanded his socialist policies all over Central and East Europe. However, the strong capitalist views as well as financial stability of the Western European regions caused Stalin to focus his regimental views mainly on the East, and as a final step in the Stalinisation of Eastern Europe, Stalin seized Czechoslovakia in February 1948. During the period of post-war communist regime, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, Poland, West Germany and East Germany stood firm with the Stalinist principles of socialistic developmental approaches. These countries had their political freedom from the English dominant administrative confinements after the wars basically from the influence of Stalinist views of politics, while possessing their own stand in their foreign policies. Hungary was under the communist rule after the World War II but it continued a foreign policy different from that of the Soviet Union (BBC News, 2012). European Divergence of Stalinism and Communism The decline of the powers of Stalinism in the European region was massively experienced long after the Wars. Industrialization and development of employment sector in independent capital investment solutions encouraged the prospects of business in the capitalist format owing to the Western influence. Stalinist followers must be considered as ignorant about the development of capitalist economy across the world after the World War II, because they continued to focus of the socialist views of employment and industrial sectors even during the post-war era. According to Jordan (1991), if socialism was at the points of merits expected by Marx and Angels, it would have produced sufficient opportunities of employment and surplus quantities of goods and services for the wellbeing of the mankind. The emergence of capitalist western thoughts gave rise to the belief that socialism was an attainable dream and a stream of thought that discourages political freedom and economic prosperity. The competition from the West Europe was so enormous that many of the profound socialist nations thought of amending their foreign policies to improve their capital gain. As Lemke & Marks (1992, p. 3) point out, besides failing to match the merits of the western competitors, the socialist economies continued to exhibit their capability to support the economic needs of their own populations. During the socialist regime, centralized administration of human resources and working capital contributed to depleting productivity among people for the reason that socialist views indirectly held people irresponsible for their commitment to productivity in most developed economies. According to Mesa-Lago & Beck (1975, p. 128), the implication of Stalinist views of socialism in the productive sector is subject to conflicts related to the leadership selection, as the deviating thoughts at the lower levels of the party cadre were projected as competitive elements that had the factionist identity. The categorization of differentiated views as factionist by the Stalinist approaches, however touched the credibility of the party, and many European political groups distanced from Stalinism in this regard. Also, the economic implications of Stalinism gave birth to critical views about the prosperity of many countries in Europe. Strict patterns of social involvement and the abstinence to state laws prescribed by Stalinism always posed a threat to the capital investments in many fields of industrial growth in various countries in Europe. With the development of various international trade agreements and peace treaties emerged after the World War II, business sector grew beyond the sizes expected by Stalinists. According to Marlin-Bennet (1993, p. 24), as a post-war business benefit, liberalism placed free trade of commodities with limited intervention of states to ascertain and accommodate market failures. All these may stand as the prolific reasons for the decline of socialism and communism in Europe, still the emphasize of communist Stalinist Russian political power existed in the East Europe, especially in East Germany for a long time. The political tension prevailed between the US and the USSR paved the way for partition of Europe as West and East by the construction of the Berlin Wall. According to Branham (2009), this attempt was, indeed, suicidal to the communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe, as the closure of passages to different countries in the neighborhood of Germany obstructed the normal life of people in Eastern Europe. As a result of the disturbances of existing political pressurization of the Stalinist dictate and the expectation of possible decline of the communist party itself in the capitalist guided European region, even the countries loyal to Stalinism gradually withdrew their support for the party. Finally, the fall of the Berlin Wall marked the entry of capitalist and democratic powers into Central Europe. Conclusion In an overview, it can be noticed that the statesmanship of Stalin was greatly appreciable in his time, as his efforts had accounted for the rapid political and socio-economic growth of Russia and the expansion of socialistic views across Europe. His five-year plans and strategic movements after the formation of the USSR claim a lot of credit. However, his prime inspiration of being the world leader and excessive political competiveness enter him to list of autocrats of the world. Although he had tried hard for the seizure of Europe under communist regime, some of his thoughtless actions and their results distanced the emerging communist European communist nations from continuing the faith in Stalinist socialism. References BBC News., 20 February 2012. Romania country profile, [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Branham, J., 2009. The 20th anniversary- The Berlin wall and the fall of communism, Examiner, [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Foster, WZ., 2007. Lenin and Stalin as mass leaders, The Communist, XVIII (12), [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Jordan, ZP., 1991. A survey of the South African debate on the decline of socialism in Eastern Europe, South African Communist Party 1991/ Marxism and Anti-Imperialism in Africa, [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Krammer, M., n.d. Stalin, Soviet policy and the consolidation of a communist bloc in eastern Europe, 1944-1953, pp. 1-42, [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Lemke, C & Marks, G., 1992. From the decline to demise? The fate of socialism in Europe. In: The Crisis of Socialism in Europe. USA: Duke University Press. Mesa-Lago, C & Beck, C., 1975. Patterns and problems of governance, In: Comparative Socialist Systems: Essays on Politics and Economics. USA: University Center for International Studies. Marlin-Bennet, R., 1993. Food Fights: International Regimes and the Politics of Agricultural Trade Disputes. New York: Routledge. Western Civilization: The Modern World., 1997. Essays on 20th century Europe: Stalin and Eastern Europe, [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Read More