Free Essays on Reform In The Khrushchev Era

Soon after the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953 Nikita Khrushchev positioned himself as the new leader of the communist party in the Soviet Union. Khrushchev’s rise to power was well executed and had strikingly similar characteristics to that of Stalin’s rise to power. â€Å"Like Stalin he climbed to power on the back of a party and proved himself a master of political infighting† (McCauley 216). Khrushchev saw a nation suppressed by the years of fear and terror inflicted through the dictatorship of Stalin. He wanted to improve all aspects of the Soviet Union and would attempt to accomplish this through a series of reforms. Although he showed great political power in his rise to power his political insecurities were exploited once he was at the top. â€Å"His personal style of leadership was acceptable in an underdeveloped country but the Soviet Union of his day had outgrown him† (McCauley 220). His inability to thoroughly evaluate and foresee consequences led to the ineffectiveness of his reforms. He simply tried to do too much too fast with little knowledge of the fundamental problems. Martin McCauley states in his book Khrushchev and Khrushchevism, â€Å"Khrushchev could not grasp the root causes of the deficiencies he was attempting to eliminate. Since his conceptual grasp was faulty his solutions were also flawed† (28). As a result, his lack of political savvy when dealing with reform led to great opposition within the system. In order to fully understand the limitations of Khrushchev’s efforts it is beneficial to look at his major reforms in agriculture, industry and his administrative reorganizations. When Khrushchev took power it was clear that his major concern was geared towards the improvement of the agriculture sector. Khrushchev viewed the best way to improve living standards was to focus on food production. He believed the best way to increase output was to expand the area to be cultivated. The Virgin Lands campaign wa... Free Essays on Reform In The Khrushchev Era Free Essays on Reform In The Khrushchev Era Soon after the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953 Nikita Khrushchev positioned himself as the new leader of the communist party in the Soviet Union. Khrushchev’s rise to power was well executed and had strikingly similar characteristics to that of Stalin’s rise to power. â€Å"Like Stalin he climbed to power on the back of a party and proved himself a master of political infighting† (McCauley 216). Khrushchev saw a nation suppressed by the years of fear and terror inflicted through the dictatorship of Stalin. He wanted to improve all aspects of the Soviet Union and would attempt to accomplish this through a series of reforms. Although he showed great political power in his rise to power his political insecurities were exploited once he was at the top. â€Å"His personal style of leadership was acceptable in an underdeveloped country but the Soviet Union of his day had outgrown him† (McCauley 220). His inability to thoroughly evaluate and foresee consequences led to the ineffectiveness of his reforms. He simply tried to do too much too fast with little knowledge of the fundamental problems. Martin McCauley states in his book Khrushchev and Khrushchevism, â€Å"Khrushchev could not grasp the root causes of the deficiencies he was attempting to eliminate. Since his conceptual grasp was faulty his solutions were also flawed† (28). As a result, his lack of political savvy when dealing with reform led to great opposition within the system. In order to fully understand the limitations of Khrushchev’s efforts it is beneficial to look at his major reforms in agriculture, industry and his administrative reorganizations. When Khrushchev took power it was clear that his major concern was geared towards the improvement of the agriculture sector. Khrushchev viewed the best way to improve living standards was to focus on food production. He believed the best way to increase output was to expand the area to be cultivated. The Virgin Lands campaign wa...

How and why can the Revolutions progress be explained in di essays

How and why can the Revolutions progress be explained in di essays How and why can the Revolutions progress be explained in different ways? Every situation can be viewed with a different perspective. This is true especially when it comes to Revolutions and the way in which they develop. The progress the revolution can be explained it different ways, depending on your social status. Something that will have a negative effect on a particular person will usually be viewed as being disadvantageous, by that person. Whilst some may have found the August Decrees to be detrimental to the future of France, many will have seen this as a momentous first step after the storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789. The Abolition of Feudalism saw Nobles stripped of their titles and much of their wealth. Unless they were in the few that can be associate Lafayette, they will have not written about this change being beneficial to anyone. The effects of the abolition of feudalism have been written up as The decree [that] ruined my father-in-law. This description also makes reference to the expense the [salaried] posts involved, the expense sometimes so great that the salary did not cover them. Abolition of feudalism had a negative effect on the writer; therefore, its merits were not highlighted or even spoken of. Conversely, those who have benefited from these changes have written glowing reports. It is hard to believe that it is on that night, you must say, more than that of a Holy Saturday, that we came forth from the wretched bondage of Egypt and we have gradually slid to the bottom of an abyss from which we shall not emerge are accounts of the results of the same night. The same event, written up with such extremes of disparagement and praise. A modern historian, who has the luxury of being able to judge the affects, and thus analyze the outcome for discrepancies with 20-20 hindsight, is able to see that: ...