Mao criticised Khrushchev for his policies such as de-Stalinisation and his secret speech. He was also very critical of the policy of Peaceful Coexistence as he believed it was a way of being friendly with the United States (the enemy) and also Mao saw it abandoning millions of comrades struggling to free themselves of capitalist and imperialist oppression. This, therefore, made the USSR an ‘enemy’. How could two countries work together if they had such differing beliefs about how to run their countries? This problem had a big contribution to the split as they couldn’t agree on anything, and if they did, it was because their national interests were at risk.
Frederick William shared this view and was unwilling to potentially cause a war with such a powerful state. This caused the Frankfurt Parliament to fail because Prussia did not grasp the opportunity to unite and neither did the King, therefore Germany remained divided. Although he desired power, William IV was not willing to put himself and Prussia under control of the Frankfurt Parliament as he distrusted ‘the gentlemen of Frankfurt’. This meant that the Parliament had no real leader, and so lost support because people distrusted the parliament as an influential figure stated he would not be associated with them. This aided in causing the failure of the Parliament because with no real leader, no one could influence the masses or help to make decisions.
The majority of the voters were from the south and west of the States, which is where much of the rural land was, also, McKinley won the east and north, which is where the big business was, and where the majority of his support was. This links to my next point about the backing that they had. Another reason the populists were successful is due to large support they gained from many unions/associations. The Farmers Alliance was formed in the 1880s, it consisted of farmers in the north-west, mid-west, and southern Alliances, all of which had a majority of 1 million members; this provided the Populist Party with a big number of people supporting their party. From these numbers you can see that the party was one of the favorite in the things they promised to the people.
* Even from the start it was clear that the Provisional Govermenet weren’t going to hold the authority. * Order Number One * Didn’t help that they weren’t elected body meaning they had no legitimate authority. – didn’t represent the people. * Did nothing to try and help end power from the soviets – sign already that they were weak and useless. However this was not the only problem that showed why they were so short-lived.
However, collectivization could not be averted and this time peasant revolts was not enough to direct government policy in their favour. Revolts relating to living and working standards were not even tolerated by the weakest Communist and Tsarist regimes, with Nicholas II massacring workers at Lena Goldfields in 1912 and Khrushchev’s KGB lashing out at riots due to food shortages at Novocherkassk in
Tsar Nicholas II wasn’t much of a good ruler for Russia; he ignored the fact that Russia wasn’t doing so good and overlooked the industrialization and nationalism that was occurring throughout Russia. Nicholas II disregarded the troubles the Russians were facing and seemed to only care about himself and him staying in power. This caused people to revolt as they needed a good strong leader to help Russia survive. The main leader who started China’s revolution was Sun Yat-sen who believed China should adopt a democratic government if it were to survive. The revolutions led by him eventually led to the fall of the Qing Dynasty in China.
By 1929, Joseph Stalin who was one of the members of the ‘collective leadership’, defeated the rest and became the dominant force of the USSR. His success was part of a power struggle which began even before Lenin’s death. Stalin’s victory was not inevitable, nor was it a result of his political skills alone. There was a whole list of factors which combined to assist his victory. When Lenin was alive he made several criticisms about Stalin which were not made public.
But what teachers forget to say is how horribly wrong communism can turn out to be because human nature is simply not good enough to practice it. Rand's novel show how the communist parties took advantage of their money, abused their power and forgot the true meaning of communism "which profits not one, but all" 1 (p.436). Although the idea of communism is to distribute equal shares of the profits derived from labor to each individual in a given society, Ayn Rand's book shows that the average socialist did not receive proportional shares of the money, compared to the members of the communist Parties. She does so by including unexpected characters like Stephen Timoshenko, an ex-Russian soldier who says to a fellow comrade, "Have you ever seen a woman falling on the street, vomiting blood on the cobblestones, dying of hunger? I have.
Trotsky underestimated Stalin and what he was capable of (creating a triumvirate with Zinoviev and Kamenev, using this alliance to defeat him). He lost respect by not turning up to Lenin’s funeral, allowing Stalin to act as though he was closest to Lenin. Yet, the biggest mistake which Trotsky made was when he agreed not to publish Lenin’s
This did not happen. New thinking was required, enter Keynes! 2. What did Keynes argue in his book The Economic Consequences of the Peace? He argued that reparations forced on Germany by the Allies after WW1 were far too severe and would cripple the German economy to such an extent and would lead to socio-political problems in the future which would not be in the interest of the Allies.