The+Consequence+of+Overemphasized+Individualism

The Consequence of Overemphasized Individualism In February of 1956, Khrushchev faced a battle of ideology between the Communist party and the remaining Stalin loyalists. He became the new leader of the Soviet Union after the previously feared and all powerful leader, Stalin, had died three years prior. Stalin was incredibly power hungry and had turned the Soviet Union into a totalitarian state. He never accepted criticism, and had terrorized the citizens of the Soviet Union by mass executions. Khrushchev was the first person to question Stalin’s reign in his speech, “The Cult of the Individual”, which would defame Stalin and also imply he was tyrantistic to the Soviet Union. Khrushchev’s time as the the Soviet Union’s leader was entirely composed have crucial choices about during the Cold War as well as to his country’s own internal issues. Part of the population remained strong followers of Stalin which could have led to another civil war in the USSR ( The Hungarian Uprising of 1956). Khrushchev spoke to the 20th Congress on February 24th and 25th, intending to convince the party members to “de-Stalinize” the country as well as revert to Marxism-Leninism (Khrushchev 1). According to Ebon, “De-Stalinization meant the rewriting of history and the renaming of countless streets, factories, dams, and towns.” (Ebon 72). Khrushchev desired to eliminate “Stalin’s ghost”, which was the presence Stalin still had over the Soviet Union. He also wanted to alleviate some of the fear and strife that still shook the war torn country. His motive was to persuade the Congress to support his ideas and his position. In actuality, he also wanted to strengthen control of the USSR and improve the Communist party’s power. His harsh language and repetitive diction not only infuriated the members of Congress towards their deceased leader, but also appealed to their sense of logic through documents proving Stalin’s cruelty as well as documents from well respected leaders leaders which elevated Khrushchev’s character and convinced the Congress of Stalin’s cruel leadership. In revealing his character, Khrushchev used many texts from respected officials, including a personal testament from Lenin, to contribute to his reputation. Lenin was the leader of the Bolshevik party who had opposed the current elite class at the time, and who had also brought communism into the Soviet Union (“Marxism-Leninism”) Lenin had led the S.S.R before Stalin and he also had spread this form of ideology, which became the foundation for the world communist movement (“Marxism-Leninism”) Khrushchev solidified his power by stating that his claims were similar to Lenin’s which endorsed the idea that he had the support of the past leader. He claimed that Lenin despised the cult of the individual and sought to destroy it as well (Khrushchev 2). The cult of the individual was an ideology where a leader would exalt himself to a more powerful and higher status by using many sources like propaganda in the media. Stalin had overseen a collective group write a book colloquially called, A Short Course, which was a propagandist textbook in which Stalin compared his own ideology to that of Marxism-Leninism (Khrushchev 46). Marxism-Leninism was Lenin’s modification of Marxism which contained the belief that imperialism was the highest form of capitalism and that the working class had to be directed first before fully accepting communism (Marxism-Leninism). Stalin had “to transform the whole post-October historical period… [s]oley into an action of the ‘Stalin Genius’ (Khrushchev 46). Khrushchev further demeaned the deceased leader by pointing out that although Stalin claimed to be the author, he constantly had to praise himself in third person throughout the book. Khrushchev stated that Lenin was also wary of Stalin and disproved many of his actions including when Stalin rudely summoned and reprimanded Lenin’s wife. Lenin states in his letter that “[Y]ou [Stalin] weigh carefully whether you are agreeable to retracting your words and apologizing, or whether you prefer the severance of relations between us” (Khrushchev 5). Khrushchev continues that the documents speak for themselves so he shall not comment his opinion as the Congress remains shocked. Not only did Khrushchev show that Stalin was disrespectful to the current leader at the time’s wife, but that he also showed no remorse. He imposed that if Lenin was treated so poorly by Stalin, then he must have treated those below him like garbage which happened to include the Congress. Khrushchev took the first step in pointing out Stalin’s wrongs, and he used Lenin to strengthen his insults so he didn’t appear petty. He also mentioned that Engels, the co-founder of Marxism, stated that “Both Marx and I have always been against any public manifestation with regard to individuals” (Khrushchev 2). Khrushchev elaborated on Stalin’s focus on his own self by stating that he believed in this cult of the individual. He contributed to the idea that Stalin was a miserable leader for the Soviet Union who only cared for himself instead of his country. Khrushchev’s worlds slowly planted themselves into the minds of the Congress and built up his own position by forcing the deceased Stalin below him. Not only did he use revered individuals to build his case, but also undeniable evidence which would force the Congress to admit Stalin was out of line during most of his reign. Khrushchev’s logical aspects of his speech contained evidence concerning Stalin’s brutal abuse of power as well historical facts and statistics which the Congress was not able to disprove. He mentioned the Great Socialist October Rebellion in which two tyrants were tried for slandering Marxism-Leninism (Khrushchev 9). However, he contrasted Lenin’s choice of mercy upon the two with Stalin’s typical use of execution or banishment against those who opposed him. Lenin spared the two men and eventually granted them leadership responsibilities. Khrushchev later mentioned how Stalin typically dealt with similar situations like his decision “concerning the deportation of all Karachai from the lands on which they lived… [who were] taken and executed”(Khrushchev 36). These were innocent people that he basically wiped out which proved just another monstrous act he committed. Lenin was able to grant mercy to those who opposed him which created him in a greater respect, whereas Stalin killed anyone he deemed fit. He sought to depict Lenin as a forgiving and fair leader and to create Stalin as a monstrous one. Khrushchev influenced their views by forcing them to see facts instead of continuously uttering his opinion. Khrushchev expanded on Stalin’s acts of injustice by focusing on the “98 persons [of the 17th Congress], i.e., 70 percent, [who] were arrested and shot” (Khrushchev 13). He tried to force tension among the crowd as well as they were faced with horrendous truths. Although Khrushchev used undeniable evidence which validated his slandering of Stalin, he relied on the horrendous stories of the executions of civilians as well as fellow congressmen to send fear and discomfort to the Congress. He understood they would still appeal to pitying gestures, but mostly would be fearful of their own lives and loss of power. Stalin enacted “mass deportations of entire nations from their places of origin, together with all Communists and Komsomols without any exception” (Khrushchev 36). Khrushchev sought to appeal to the hearts of the Congress. Many of these people were tortured and executed as they were forced to leave their homes behind. The members of Congress also understood Stalin did not have mercy for any women or children for they were enemies in his eyes. Entire populations were almost wiped out as innocent people lost their lives and families. He further attempted to pull on the heartstrings of the congressmen by mentioning the “false accusations… and death of innocent people” (Khrushchev 13). Although he appeared to be solely speaking about the Russian civilians, he knew it would also spark discomfort in the members of the Congress for the fear of their own lives and safety. He counted on their fears to slowly eat them alive as he continued to address Stalin’s acts of injustice. The volatile and inflammatory tone also served the speech’s purpose to spark emotion as it created tension and unrest while also preying on the members of the Congress’s pride for their nation. By feeding off the men’s insecurities and desperation, Khrushchev sparked fury throughout the room from Stalin’s unjust rule. Instead of simply fearing Stalin’s acts towards the past members of the 17th Congress, they became infuriated and defensive towards their past leader. Khrushchev’s constant use of the phrases “abuse of grave power” and “mass terror” contributed to his spiteful diction toward Stalin. By depicting him as unstable and indecisive, he described Stalin as a tyrant. Khrushchev desperately wanted to begin the de-Stalinization of the Soviet Union, so he portrayed Stalin as a cruel and selfish leader. If he demeaned Stalin’s attributes than the Congress would more likely support the de-Stalinization process. However, he was still able to integrate his views of communism to the Congress. He referred to many people who were killed or accused of false crimes of simply being “honest Communists” (Khrushchev 13). By using mighty words to describe communism, he elevated those who supported it. Khrushchev also elevated the USSR by stating that “The magnificent, heroic deeds of hundreds of millions of people … [w]ill live for centuries”(Khrushchev 35). In emphasizing the people of the USSR, he reflected his belief in their triumph as a nation as well as true pride and passion towards his country. Khrushchev consolidated his power as leader of the Soviet Union by promising a new found glory to his unstable nation as it continued its quest for power and victory. Khrushchev's language also spoke on the behalf of communism and the importance of mutual collaboration. He sought to establish unity between the members of the Congress and himself by claiming they are all equal in power, unlike how they were during Stalin’s rule. The diction served Khrushchev’s character by endorsing his idea that every member was mandatory for the successfulness of the USSR which he used to connect to the audience. Khrushchev brilliantly mentioned one of Lenin’s famous quotes, “Only he who believes in the people, [he] who submerges himself in the fountain of the living creativeness of the people, will win and retain power” (Khrushchev 2). Khrushchev’s use of Lenin’s quote assured that he believed in collaborative leadership and reestablished his speech’s credibility by creating a sense of equality throughout the Congress. The diction served Khrushchev’s ethos by endorsing his idea that every member was mandatory for the successfulness of the Soviet Union. In Khrushchev’s speech to the 20th Congress, it was obvious that he was very passionate about the Soviet Union and doing what he thought was most beneficial. He was the first person to confront Stalin’s tight control of the Soviet Union which still remained after his death. The USSR had become a place of terror and fear for many civilians because of the atrocities and murders Stalin had committed. After his speech “Communist party members and leftwing intellectuals who had spent years denying reports about what was going on in the Soviet Union” were forced to see the truth (Cavendish). Khrushchev effectively handled the issues presented from being Stalin’s successor through elevating his character, confronting many of Stalin’s acts towards the past Congresses and people, and finally sealing the deal by sparking fury and strife through his audience. Khrushchev drastically altered the Soviet Union by forcing them to think about who Stalin truly was. After his speech, there was a deathly hush throughout the room, some people cried, some had heart attacks within a few weeks, and a few people even committed suicide (Nikita Khrushchev’s Secret Speech). Many of the members of Congress were horrified by realizing how cruel Stalin was. Khrushchev had reached his original goal which was to strengthen the Communist party and to prevent any more members from becoming Stalin loyalists. He had also started the process of de-Stalinization in which many statues of Stalin were vandalized and broken into pieces (Ebon 72). However, the impacts of his speech reached much farther than just the Soviet Union. Many leaders from areas that supported communism in Eastern Europe interpreted Khrushchev’s speech as a promise to greater freedom as places like Poland challenged Moscow’s control (Ebon 74). According to Ebon, the worst rebellion occurred in Hungary in 1956 and “[a]fter several days of bitter combat, the Soviets succeeded in crushing the revolt”(Ebon 76). Hungary’s revolt did not stand a chance against the Soviet’s army. Khrushchev had gone from his speech which proclaimed positivity to a decision to ruthlessly crush the Hungarians with tanks and other types of weaponry. Eventually the Soviet Union’s idea of Marxism-Leninism battled with that of China’s which caused tension between the two as well as the Sino-Soviet split in 1960 (“Marxism-Leninism”). Both countries argued who the true heir was to the ideology, and “the Chinese were especially critical of post-Stalin leadership in the USSR” (Marxism-Leninism). Khrushchev’s speech not only impacted his own people, but caused strife between the two main factions that represented communism. The Soviet Union did not only have tensions with China, but tensions continued to increase between the USSR and the USA. The battle between capitalism and communism raged on as the Soviet Union was thrown deeper into the dark, whirling abyss with the United States as they both were approaching the height of the Cold War.

__ Works Cited __ Cavendish, Richard. "Stalin Denounced by Nikita Khrushchev." Stalin Denounced by Nikita Khrushchev. History Today, Feb. 2006. Web. 28 Mar. 2015. . Ebon, Martin. Nikita Khrushchev. New York: Chelsea House, 1986. Print. Khrushchev, Nikita. "Speech to 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U." Speech to 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Mar. 2015. . "Nikita Khrushchev's Secret Speech - History in an Hour." History in an Hour. N.p., 24 Feb. 2013. Web. 01 Apr. 2015. . "Marxism-Leninism." New World Encyclopedia. N.p.,22 Sep 2014. Web. 17 Apr 2015. < [|http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org] /> Trueman, Chris. "The Hungarian Uprising of 1956." The Hungarian Uprising of 1956. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2015. .