Why Was The Soviet Union Was Justified For The Soviet Union

The events which unfolded within Russia throughout the early 20 th Century led not

only to political and economic change, but also social upheaval which similarly ran

parallel to the international crisis of the time. From the moment of the Tsar’s

abdication in March 1917 the Bolshevik party had sought to strengthen its control

within Russia alongside promoting the spread of socialism and world revolution by

the peasantry. Yet, with Lenin’s death and Stalin’s rise to power, there seemed to be

a shift by which the party and country was operated. Indeed, by 1930 the Soviet

Union was seen very differently both internally and outside of its borders. Some may

see this as a ‘second revolution’ and in a sense, it is somewhat justified due to
Indeed, investigators no longer

had to prove that an individual had to have the intention of a crime or if they had

actually carried it out. Because of this Old Bolshevik party members could actually

be accused of having previously opposed the party line. Thus, the changed and

hostile nature of the Soviet Union was transformed by a threat of a possible

revolution. However, once again much of these policies resided with Stalin’s

insecure and pragmatic nature.

To conclude, while it is reasonable to suggest that a ‘second revolution’ is to blame

for the changed nature of the Soviet Union during the 1930s, this does not entirely

explain the transformation which actually took place. Instead, the nature of

transformation came from Stalin’s own insecurity and pragmatism relative to the

various crisis occurring within and outside the borders of Russia. It was this desire

for survival which triggered many of his economic policies along with his desire to

secure Russia and strengthen his own brand of ideology within the Soviet Union.

Regardless, as stated by Hoffmann ‘Stalinism represents one of the darkest and

most complex pages of human history, and it therefore deserves our most