 |
| Stalin and Mao: The Unhappy Couple |
PROMPT: Compare and contrast the rise to power of Stalin and Mao
(I've shared a document with you entitled, "Comparing Stalin and Mao's Rise - LAST." Make a copy of it and share it with me. Replace LAST with your last name. Your answer will go on top of this document. A digital copy of the reading is below.)
While you can certainly use your own knowledge outside of the reading, focus on the material contained in the reading to keep this exercise as simple as possible.
When comparing dictators you ALWAYS want to be thematic and compare/contrast them in a running style, NOT end-on.
Running C/C: Stalin did this, Mao did this. Stalin did this, however Mao did this.
End-On C/C: Stalin did this. Stalin did that. And then he did this. THEN Mao did this, Mao did that. And then he did this.
See the document for factors you may want to consider. This assignment is due prior to class Thursday. It is worth 20 TEST points.
Bonus Material from Mr. Hyer: Stalin Declares War on the Kulaks
NOTE: Definition of Kulaks: They were the relatively affluent peasants in the Russian countryside. They had benefited from the NEP program because they were usually a better farmer who made efficient use of their farmland and had a knack for selling their crops for more profits than their less inclined peasant neighbors.
Stalin declares war on them in 1929 because of the perceived danger they present to his collectivization program. So the overall effect was as follows: He literally destroys his best farmers and leaves the mediocre ones to tackle a impossible national agricultural task.
Stalin in a speech Dec. 29, 1929:
“... Now we are able to carry on a determined offensive against the kulaks, to break their resistance, to eliminate them as a class and substitute for their output the output of the collective farms and state farms. Now, the kulaks are being expropriated by the masses of poor and middle peasants themselves, by the masses who are putting solid collectivization into practice. Now, the expropriation of the kulaks in the regions of solid collectivization is no longer just an administrative measure. Now, the expropriation of the kulaks is an integral part of the formation and development of the collective farms. Consequently it is now ridiculous and foolish to discourse on the expropriation of the kulaks. You do not lament the loss of the hair of one who has been beheaded.
There is another question which seems no less ridiculous: whether the kulaks should be permitted to join the collective farms. Of course not, for they are sworn enemies of the collective-farm movement ....”
