Political Impact: This source shows that Stalin uses many propaganda pictures and photos to build his popularity. Stalin was presented in posters, films, books and many more as the successor of Lenin and the great leader for the USSR. I chose this source as the reason to why Soviet people have build loyalty to Stalin is because they are exposed to a lot of Stalin propaganda which influenced them. This source shows that Stalin's rule was beneficial for USSR as to the people, they have found a 'good' leader who can lead the country well. The Soviet people thinks that Stalin was a great and honourable person.
Political impact: This source is a British cartoon depicting the nature of the Show Trials where Stalin attempted to legitimise the execution of his enemies in the party. Using show trials, old Bolsheviks like Zinoviev, Kamenev were accused of being traitors to the state and plotting the murder of Kirov and others. By eliminating older figures, Stalin was able to promote younger men who owed their success to him. This made them completely loyal to him. I chose this source as it clearly implies that Stalin has strategic planning and the show trials has a specific purpose, which is to get rid of anyone who might be potential rival to him. This source shows that Stalin's rule was not beneficial for USSR as some people are unfairly treated and being wrongly accused.
Political impact: This source is a political satire referring to the Purges. Anyone who was likely to oppose Stalin was purged and removed. The source shows a hill of skull which represents the huge number of people that Stalin had eliminated. The results of the purges and trials made Stalin very powerful and no one dares to oppose him. He eliminated people who are poets, writers, artists, musicians, anyone creative who might have ideas which Stalin did not like and even scientists, engineers, experts of any kind who Stalin did not trust or understand. Only loyal party officials, who accepted Stalin’s decision without question were safe. I chose this source as it implies how deadly and powerful Stalin was in eliminating people who he potrayed as threats to him. This source shows that Stalin's rule was not beneficial as many innocent lives were lost and many had to pretend that they are supporters of Stalin and obey him in order to not get arrested and being killed.
Political Impact: This source is a Stalin Propaganda Poster in 1937. The caption reads: 'Thanks to the Party, Thanks to Dear Stalin for a Happy, Joyful Childhood' It shows that the children shows affection to Stalin and also implies that Stalin will bring great improvements and joy to the children of USSR. Stalin effectively use propaganda like films and newspapers to project a positive image of himself like a father to them. Propaganda posters were placed everywhere to remind and let everyone know Stalin's contributions and achievements for the country .There was a sense of loyalty pledged to Stalin amongst the youth. I chose this source as it shows how powerful and intelligent Stalin was to use such method of propaganda to influence others to think that he was a great and honourable person. This source shows that Stalin"s rule was beneficial for USSR by potraying himself as an almighty leader and saviour of the USSR.
Economic Impact: This source shows the people living in towns and cities, but their living conditions were not much better then the peasants that were living on the country side. Industrialisation had led to a fall in the standard of living among the Soviet people. The drive towards industrialisation and growth of industrial city resulted in the movement of people from rural areas to industrial city. There was a shortage of housing, leading to overcrowding. Living conditions are bad and this worsens the lives of the people because this led to a fall in their standard of living. This source was chosen as it shows the bad living conditions the people are facing and moving to the city did not benefit them at all. This source does not show that the Stalin's rule was beneficial for USSR because the conditions of the homes in the city were awful. Most had no running water or sewage system. The working life in the city was just as bad, men and women had to work long hours and had very low wages. Therefore, the people were living a tough life after Stalin's rule.
Economic Impact: The 8 minutes video provides an overview of the industrialisation and collectivisation during Stalin's rule. It uses video evidence to show how collectivisation worsened the lives of many peasants, especially the kulaks. Those who opposed collectivisation were dealt with harshly. Many kulaks, which are the rich peasants, refused to join the collective farms as their hard-earned property and wealth would be confiscated by the state. This was shown in the video from 6 minutes onwards. I chose this source as it potrays how the Stalin's rule brings negative impacts to the lives of many as they were controlled and monitored closely by the government and have no freedom to do whatever they want to or oppose the government. This source shows that Stalin's rule was not beneficial for USSR because it worsened the lives of many peasants like the kulaks as it caused suffering and misery to them.
Economic Impact: This source shows a 1932 poster by Demi proclaiming the results of the first Five Year Plan. The banner above Stalin states "5 Year Plan in 4 years". The figure on the left represents people who had opposition to the plan. Stalin developed three Five-Year plans between 1928-1938 to centralise the economy and achieve industrialisation. The first, second and third Five-Year plan focused on improving heavy industry, concentrated on heavy industry and focusing on consumer goods respectively for the three Five-Year plan. Stalin set ambitious target. Factory managers and workers were to work towards achieving those specific targets or they will have to face harsh disciplinary measures. People oppose to the Five-Year plan as they suffer from effects like poor working conditions in factories and conditions were harsh. Workers suffered tremendous hardship and they were unhappy. This source is chosen as it shows that not everyone agrees to the Five-Year plan and there were actually unhappy with what Stalin's plan. This source shows that Stalin's rule was not beneficial for USSR by showing that people oppose Stalin's plan as they live in constant fear at work and life was bad for them.
Economic impact: This photo is from the front page of a Chicago American newspaper in 1935, showing the famine in Ukraine. By 1940, almost all farms had been collectivised. Collectivisation refers to Stalin's plan for setting up large state-run farms called kolkhozes. The purpose was to produce more food and introduce farming methods like the use of tractors and combined harvesters in the USSR. However, collectivisation failed to increase agriculture production. To worsen the situation, the state did not distribute stockpiled grain but exported it to fund industrialisation. This led to widespread famine in the rural areas of USSR in 1932 and 1933, especially in grain-rich areas like Ukraine and Kazakhstan. This was called the Great Famine. It resulted in more than 4 million dead. This source is chosen because it shows the sufferings that people, as well as animals, went through. Many did not have any or enough food to survive during the Great Famine. The crops that belong to the peasants, which are their source of food, are now taken away from them, leading them to suffer from starvation and die due to the lack of food. This source shows that Stalin's rule was not beneficial for USSR as the collectivisation worsened the lives of many people and destroyed Soviet farming, resulting in the Great Famine.
In conclusion, Stalin was not a saviour of USSR. In short term, Stalin was able to establish his control and industrialise the USSR. However, in long term, Stalin's rule brings negative impact to people, such as starvation, bad living conditions and poor standard of living. The lives of the Soviet people were affected badly. Stalin's rule did not benefit the USSR, therefore Stalin was not a saviour of the USSR.