Comparison of Hitler vs Stalin - Research Paper Example

Hitler vs. Stalin Name: Class: Teacher Date: Comparison of Hitler vs. Stalin Introduction As Russians dipped into the unseen claws of Stalin, the Germans like wise were sliding slowly to the same pits of death and destruction as Hitler galvanized huge support across the country to rise to power. These two dictators later on become murders and a curse on the planet a role they both played in there for greater power than they already had. Surprisingly these two similarities caused both nations to hate and loathe each other as each chose its own way to lead their campaign, with Stalin in his manner choosing Marxism while Hitler settled for fascism1. Much blame can be placed on the two but, it is good to observe that these atrocities were well managed by their supporters who had the choice to disagree, but only got with them to achieve their own ends2. Companies were known to support these two leaders, including individuals like Henry Ford who supported Hitler in the beginning with financial aid, which without Hitler’s campaign would have hardly managed to rise to the level he raised. It can be said the strongest supporters like Nikolai Yezhov, who spear headed Stalin’s campaign, should also be given a share of the blame for the rise of the two monsters3. This paper has been divided into four sections to simplify the reading, with the first section, one will have discussed what made Hitler and Stalin equals by comparing their similarities. In the second section the differences will be analyzed, which were chosen in order to bring each other side’s history to the front, rather than having a direct comparison as in section one4. In the third section the rise to power of each side will lead into finalizing the paper with the discussion as to why Hitler was demonized more than Stalin was. Similarities of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin The fact that Stalin and Hitler killed millions during their reign makes them equal. This can further be observed by their striking similarities i.e. they desperately hated each other despite the fact that both were dictators. Hitler was a fascist while Stalin was a communist both however were later observed as careless murderers. Both Hitler and Stalin lost their fathers during their childhoods with Stalin father dying while he was just 11 and Hitler’s father dying when he was 13. Additionally it would be worth noting other similarities that both had in terms of their background. Stalin, who at first was known as Loseb Besarionis dze Jughashvilib, later settled for Stalin, Changing his Georgian name Loseb, which meant steel to a Russian name Stalin which also meant steel. Likewise, Adolph Hitler was first known as Schicklgruber picking on his mothers surname which he later changed to Georg Hitler picking along his second fathers name Georg5 He later preferred to be reckoned with the name Hitler which was his biological fathers name6. It was later recorded like Stalin, Hitler had an abusive father and that might have been something that developed Hitler’s problems with systems of authority. Like Stalin, Hitler’s father virtually abandoned them and this was after both of them lost their siblings. Hitler’s mother lost three children before Hitler and Stalin’s mother lost two children, also before Stalin7. Despite their survival Hitler and Stalin were sickly children and both dictators enjoyed great love from their mothers. They both were raised to become religious individuals with Hitler preferring Catholicism to Stalin’s orthodox choice. Both received theological education. Since Hitler’s mother desired for her son to be a catholic priest he attended Benedictine monastery8. Equally Stalin’s mother wished for her son to become an orthodox priest, which led to Stalin attending Orthodox theological school and seminary. Hitler developed into an excellent artist while in school as Stalin developed into the same. At early ages both were observed to be excellent students but later both of them failed to graduate from high school. Both men would become social dropouts living on their own by age 209. In 1913 both Stalin and Hitler lived in Vienna where Hitler was fascinated by fascism Stalin was fascinated by Marxism. These were beliefs that each held so dearly that they both experienced time in jail. Afterwards Hitler moved to Germany in pursue of politics, simultaneously?? Stalin moved to Russia to pursue of a political career. At age 33 Stalin was part of the Bolshevik Party revival while in the same age Hitler lead the revival of the Nazi Party. By age 35Hitler wrote MeinKempf, outlining Nazi policy. By age 34, Stalin wrote Marxism and the national question outlining Bolshevik policy. In 1931 Hitler’s lover committed suicide with a pistol while in the following year1932 Stalin’s lover committed suicide with a pistol, as well. Both of their lovers were in their early 20s; Stalin’s 21 and Hitler’s 22. By the age of 45, both men are seen to purge their political enemies with Stalin purging communist foes while Hitler was seen to purge Nazi party foes10. Differences Hitler’s and Stalin in their rise to power Hitler rise to power Hitler’s rise to power was perpetuated by many and not just a single man with a goal. But many Germans who were still angry about turn of events of the First World War one. This anger was exacerbated by the Treaty of Versailles, which became Hitler’s source of vicious expansionism and which appealed to most Germans of the time. This was coupled with an ineffective constitution that crippled the government of the day. Thus when crisis came in 1929-1933 nobody was in a position to stop Hitler as the financial support of many businessmen gave him the money to sprint his propaganda and election machines. Hitler’s creation of Nazi propaganda persuaded the German population to believe that the Jews were the cause of all their woes and that Hitler was their only and last hope. Hitler in his mastery of spoken word managed to promise every German something and this resulted in unprecedented support to the surprise of those who had called him the paper clip11. Hitler managed to somehow in his own way to fish support from enough hooligans like the storm troopers who went around attacking Jews and Hitler’s main opposition. Many of Hitler’s opponents were struck? Filled? Instantly with the fear of death so as a result they kept their disagreements to themselves. The storm troopers moved around freely and the judicial arm of government was seen to fail in doing anything. Hitler’s public speaking, in the absence of opposition, headed him for all the power he needed. He established good organization skills as a politician though he was also viewed as unstable. He believed he had been chosen by God to be a dictator of Germany and the leader of the world. Stalin rise to power Though it would be argued that there were similarities between Stalin and Hitler in their rise to power the differences are seen to stand out as you come to understand each of them. After the death of Lenin in 1924 it was thought that Trotsky, the leader of the Red Army, was next in line especially after Lenin said that Stalin was dangerous and should be closed out. However, this was not the case as Stalin in his own way managed to out wit the so-called brilliant Trotsky and become leader. What no one saw coming was that Stalin’s strategy to power commenced in 1922 when he was made the General Secretary of the Communist Party, a position that many considered of little importance. However, working from the background Stalin managed to work his way up the ladder to presidency12. Stalin’s secretarial position allowed him to control the stream of information, and he was able to cut off his enemies, funneling more power and information to his own faction. Stalin’s position in the Orguburo allowed him direct control of important slots of responsibility in the party structure, which he cleverly filled with his supporters therefore reversing the support for his opponents to himself. These positions included party secretaries elsewhere like in the Ukraine. This new persons were influential enough to decide how lower party members voted13. Stalin’s influence on the party delegation meant he would set the congress with his own base resulting on Trotsky receiving hostile treatment from the conferences from 1924 onwards. Stalin’s control over membership permitted him to get rid of non-supporters who were likely to support Trotsky. At this very time that Stalin worked his way passed Trotsky who everybody acknowledged was brilliant but whom was falling out of favor with most people. Stalin made things worse by misinforming Trotsky about the date of Lenin’s funeral and as a result he missed furthering his unpopularity. This unpopularity was worsened by Trotsky’s ambition to cause a world revolution, which Russians feared would ruin their great nation. Stalin insider tactics of playing opponents against each other was one of his greatest abilities that led to his success. He was good at exploiting opponents’ weaknesses; he managed to change his once disregarded position into a tool for gathering power and support even when he was under Lenin. This, combined with his access to state press, allowed him to steadily build a base of followers away from the eyes of his opponents. Trotsky, his only major opponent, was already destroyed before Stalin turned his guns to him. This left Stalin as the lesser evil in comparison with the other autocrats, which was another factor led to him ascending to power. Stalin was an opportunist and could easily change his position depending on public opinion, a factor that endeared him to the people with time. He targeted young, urban workers and poorly educated ex peasants, who were attracted by his nationalism policies. This only destroyed Trotsky and his hope of return to favor was vanquished14 The choice of Nikolai Yezvov, an ardent Stalinist, as leader of Stalin’s campaign was an example of Stalin’s ability to pick people who were completely loyal to him. Nikolai was seen to be a believer in Stalinist violent repression and he was seen working hard to increase the list of names thought to be enemies of the state from all nationalities such as Polish or old opposition which had faded with time. He was considered to distrust the soviet secret police and in 1936 he convinced Stalin to Stalin to fire the head of NKVD, Genrikh Yagoda, who he replaced with Nikolai himself. Finally, it would seem Stalin had one among him who used his tactics in Nikolai, who later accused Bukharin and Alex Rykov at the December 1936 Plenum of treachery. Bukharin was put through torture to confess of conspiring against Stalin and later he was executed. More of Nikolai protégés were ordered executed and this included members in the NKVD and those in the Politburo who had condemned the excesses of NKVD15. Differences that show equality and the power of strong support It is safe to say that Hitler and Stalin were the cruelest dictators of the twentieth century in Europe. Combined they killed they killed over thirty million people. Stalin come to power at a time that Russia was discussing whether in the Marxist country the new adopted economic policy was viable16. It was during this tangle that Stalin snatched power in a crafty manner. Once in power he kept changing the economic policies with the end game plan to eradicate his foes. At the same time Hitler was gaining power in Germany, which was suffering the side effects of the First World Warn. Unlike Stalin, who snatched power through cunningness, Hitler used his oratory abilities do the same. Hitler managed to make believable promises to the Germans who were caught up in deep economic depression. In addition, using their troubles catapulted him in to power17. Hitler and Stalin opponents unfortunately were poorly informed about the two and it is clear the opponents of the two couldn’t seem to see through them. They went as far as nicknaming Stalin the comrade paper clip in relevance to his significance to the Russian public. This was the same with Hitler opponents who undermined him and thus repeated the same mistake that was repeated Stalin opponents did: Hitler was given the position of a party leader by people who thought they could control him, unfortunately they were wrong they misjudged him greatly and as a result he over powered them to snatch power from them in the wake just as Stalin did with his Russian opponents. Unlike Hitler, Stalin was not a perfect public speaker. He couldn’t even speak Russian fluently whilst they were very different in their methods of gaining popularity; yet they were both accepted by the people. Stalin was used his Georgian past as peasant to endear himself to Russians, while Hitler on the other hand put himself up to be seen by the German people as a god, completely different from the people he was going to lead, this he outlook he managed to perpetuate by using his great oratory skills that attracted him to many who heard his speeches and charisma. However if they had not managed to attract followers then it would have been impossible to take power and retain it the way they did. Supporters in each case were fundamental to the success of each of them. If in any case Stalin would have won power without much support it would be expected in regard to his later actions, he would have killed many more Russians in his conquest to iron out resistance. However the same cannot be said if Hitler had no support since the Holocaust was a child of his propaganda majorly built on his supporters, therefore one would deem it almost impossible for Hitler to have even managed to cross the border invading other countries without strong and vibrant German support18. How and why Hitler was demonized, possibly more than Stalin Joseph Stalin in comparison to Adolf Hitler was far more loved while Hitler was far more loathed and demonized by the western media. This is not to say Stalin’s behavior was far better than Hitler’s, but it clearly shows the way the world judged two similar crimes. One dictator receives full and hateful judgment while the other received what would be the judgment of a prodigal son by a father that misses his son despite his clear mishaps19. It can be argued that the reason the two were given two different treatments was reserved totally with who they supported and who they hated. In the case of Hitler he demonized the Jews and killed while fighting against them while Stalin also known us “Uncle Joe” was killing while fighting for the Jews20. This is seen when Hitler went on a warring campaign in Poland and the then Czechoslovakia, the western world almost went crazy with rage. This however, was not the case with Stalin as he crashed his way through Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Lithuania and Poland the west was silent and his actions in late 1930s known as the purge which were very similar to Kristallnacht were viewed as legitimate response to internal threat, by the west, While Hitler faced the wrath of the west.21 it would be argued the west saw Hitler more of a danger in comparison after all he was heading in their direction, while on the other hand Stalin concentrated in conquering his eastern neighbors far away from the western spheres this alone was enough to warrant Hitler a more scathing treatment. It was under Stalin’s rule that seven to ten million people died in what was a man made famine of 1932 to 1933 in the Soviet Union Ukraine, Volga Region Northern Caucasus, and, Kazakhstan, and West Siberia. This famine was blamed on forced kolkhoz’s (collectivization of agriculture) which led to anarchy in the countryside22. This led to farmers abstaining from work and the farms peasants’ activist’s possessions were destroyed. The selling and killing of horses due to fear that they would be taken by the soviet authority saw the famine even further perpetuated. The authorities blamed the rich peasants known as Kulaks for sabotage. This attempt failed miserably and what followed was the seizure of the peasant’s remaining crops taken away from them and what they had for the following year seed corn. Again the western media looked the other way23. This was not the same treatment that Hitler received. By 1930s Hitler camps pre war contained about 20 to 30,000 total inmates with only 10% to 15% Jews. The rest were mostly Hitler’s political opponents such as the social democrats and catholic center party. It would be observed however during this time Hitler was making Germany far better and advanced than Stalin did for Russia. Stalin at the same time was dragging Russia back to Stone Age with over five hundred thousand imprisoned in his Gulags. Still, Hitler was loathed as much as a demon while Stalin managed to be accredited with the attitude of an angel. This begs the question why two murders were treated so differently24. It would be thus wise to observe the actions of Stalin against those of Hitler. Hitler was considered to hate and kill Jews. Stalin on the other hand was electing Jews as his commissars to be specific two thirds of Stalin commissars were Jews. Thus Stalin got a free pass while Hitler paid for his aggressiveness against the Jews25. To prove Stalin relationship with Jews gave him the look of a saint later in his life he turned against them and as a result his reputation sank. In addition, suddenly after Stalin had killed Jews it was remembered he was responsible for the death of thirty million Russians, which was incomparable with Hitler’s Holocaust count of Six million Jews26. This however didn’t bring Stalin the same magnitude of demonization as Hitler got; Stalin managed to go through history far unscathed in comparison to Hitler despite the astronomical number of deaths caused by him. Conclusion It is the hope that this paper fully points out how two people can destroy the lives of so many over bad policies that are governed by unchecked ambition. As observed in Hitler it one can see that a good public speaker is not always a great leader neither is a person who connects to the public like Stalin did always geared to the things he is known for. Like many Russians of his time it is thus the responsibility of each of us to tactically look and criticize bad policies especially of powerful nations27. The case of Hitler points to hatred led campaign that aimed to destroy a whole race a factor that saw Hitler more hated than Stalin. Stalin on the other hand was a character that not only would be described as selfish and completely mad but one as noted by Lenin in his final wishes as dangerous. This case would be best used to critically criticize leaders despite their popularities28. For both leaders it would be important to not they used their popularities to push their way to godly dictatorship a factor that should be observed with caution29. It is thus in conclusion that each nation has the responsibility to ensure a strong constitution than deters such men from reaching such heights. However it is also the responsibility of the international community to ensure the safety of each human being to avoid such a scenario ever repeating itself. Bibliography Burrell, Joseph. The Republican treason Republican fascism exposed. New York: Algora Pub, 2008. Byars, Ronald P. The sacraments in biblical perspective. Louisville, Ky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011. Cunningham, Dane T. Risky relationships : an insightful look into success and failure in relationships. Decatur, Ga: Embrace Relationships Seminars Inc. Xulon Press, 2004. Gruntman, Mike. Blazing the trail : the early history of spacecraft and rocketry. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2004. Hirsch, E. D., Joseph F. Kett, and James S. Trefil. The new dictionary of cultural literacy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2002. Holland, Matthew F. Eisenhower between the wars : the making of a general and statesman. Westport, Conn: Praeger, 2001. Paolo, Marc. War, politics and superheroes ethics and propaganda in comics and film. Jefferson, N.C: McFarland & Co., Publishers, 2011. Romano, Michael J. CliffsNotes AP European history with CD-ROM. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Pub, 2010. Smeulers, Alette, and Fred Grünfeld. International crimes and other gross human rights violations : a multi- and interdisciplinary textbook. Leiden Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2011. Todd, Allan, and Sally Waller. Authoritarian and single party states. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Read More