The Split in Stalin's Secretariat, 1939-1948

The question of the relationship between the Party and the State is crucial for understanding Soviet political system. Jonathan Harris goes to the heart of the matter by examining two principal views about the Communist Party’s role in Soviet society during the late 1930s and 1940s. Drawing on a meticulous analysis of the main party publications during this period, the author reconstructs the main battle lines between Georgii Malenkov and Andrei Zhdanov, the two antagonists of the book.
The book provides a very detailed and extensive analysis of the debates about Party's role in Soviet system as it appeared in the official press. However, without a much needed discussion of the 1948 reform of the Party apparatus and use of archival sources, there are few arguments which were not already present in the original article by Jonathan Harris published in 1976.

The Kremlin's Scholar. A Memoir of Soviet Politics under Stalin and Khrushchev

The memoirs are dominated by two grand figures of Soviet history, Stalin and Khrushchev. The account of Stalin is riddled with ambiguities. There is an undoubted personal admiration for Stalin, his intellectual and political capacity (Stalin allegedly read 300 pages per day), his simplicity in daily life seen in "an old tunic, patched-up socks, almost constant isolation" (p. 190). At the same time, Shepilov acknowledged the paranoid aspects of Stalin's personality, especially towards the end of his life. Stalin's mechanisms of power are illustrated by Shepilov's account of work on a new book on political economy. Stalin personally chose key people for important tasks and controlled them at key junctures to ensure the desired outcome. In this light, Shepilov's claims that the Great Purges of the late 1930s could have been outside of Stalin's immediate control seem implausible, to say the least (p. 41).

All Stalin's deficiencies, however, pale in comparison with those of Khrushchev, the bête noire of Shepilov's memoirs. There is plenty of criticism of Khrushchev's policies, particularly in agriculture and foreign affairs. What comes across most pungently is, however, Shepilov's disdain of Khrushchev's personality and leadership style. In this respect, the book is unashamedly biased and remarkable for its omissions as much as for its revelations.

Stalin and the Soviet Union : the USSR 1924-1953.

Los años 1924-1953 estuvieron dominados por la figura de Stalin, el culto a su figura y su lucha por el poder en el Partido Comunista. Se describen los planes quinquenales de desarrollo de la economía soviética, así como las purgas y los juicios de la década de 1930. Por último, se examina la manera en que la URSS reaccionó a la amenaza de los países capitalistas durante los años 1920 y 1930 y en la forma en que luchó por la supervivencia contra la Alemania nazi durante la segunda guerra mundial.Incluye fragmentos de fuentes históricas originales, así como, material de aprendizaje activo: ejercicios, preguntas, y pruebas.

Stalin: The Five-Year Plans&Collectivisation.

Este libro desarrolla conocimientos básicos de historia para aprobar los exámenes de AS/A de enseñanza secundaria. Los temas del libro son: ¿Cuáles son los puntos de vista sobre Stalin? ¿Porqué Stalin industrializó la Unión Soviética?, Stalin como líder, ¿Porqué la colectivización?, la domesticación de los campesinos, las granjas colectivas, ¿Cuáles fueron las consecuencias de la colectivización?¿Como de útil fue la colectivización?, ¿Cómo Stalin industrializó la Unión Soviética?, La Unión Soviética de Stalin: ¿una nación transformada? ¿Una nueva sociedad comunista o un experimento fallido?.

Stalin: From Grey Blur to Great Terror.

Este libro desarrolla conocimientos básicos de historia para aprobar los exámenes de AS/A de enseñanza secundaria. Los temas del libro son: ¿Quién fue Stalin?, después de Lenin ¿Porqué Stalin?, los últimos años de Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky y la oposición de izquierdas, la ruptura de Stalin con la oposición de derechas, la economía estalinista: ¿un medio de control?, la necesidad de industrialización, colectivización: el dominio de los campesinos, defendiendo cambios en el poder, consolidando el poder, las vidas secretas del Kremlin, la propaganda estalinista: ¿hubo alguna verdad detrás de las mentiras?.

The Evolution of Totalitarianism: From Stalin to Putin

The Soviet Union is commonly cited as "totalitarian." But just how totalitarian was the Soviet Union? The modern Russian Federation? There is an ongoing debate in Georgia about the Soviet past, the role of Stalin in Georgian history, an importance of Soviet legacies in shaping the nationalist discourse after independence and etc. Various roundtables and conferences reflecting on the historical, political and sociological contexts of the Soviet occupation are held in Georgian academic institutions and universities. On a discursive level, it is taken as a given that the „Evil Empire‟ was indeed totalitarian – brutally repressive, all-encompassing, and terrorizing. The term "totalitarian" embodies a multitude of concepts which we will try to discuss in a historical perspective, testing the extent of applicability and relevance of this term to modern-day Russia.

Essad Bey: Stalin [Rezension]

Noah.