Free Essay

Difference Between Hitler and Stalin

In:

Submitted By ajtajt
Words 1470
Pages 6
El autor Michael Sodaro describe a las dictaduras como los sistemas en el mundo que tiene como característica principal, un poder del estado completamente sobre la población, reprimiendo todo tipo de oposición en contra del estado; se atribuyen poder total de violar cualquier de los derechos humanos. Es decir que la o las personas que se encuentran en el mando de las dictaduras, tiene el poder absoluto sobre su pueblo para guiarlo exclusivamente a los objetivos que tienen. Esto quiere decir, que para que el estado haga todo lo que quiera hacer, debe obviamente violar bastantes libertades que son muy caracterizadoras de las democracias por ejemplo. Aunque en todos los tipos de regímenes políticos siempre van haber contrapartes que nunca van a estar de acuerdo, las dictaduras son los cuales crean más desacuerdo contra el estado que está al mando. El simple hecho de que quiten las libertades a la mayoría crea una des conformidad desequilibrante que juega un papel de antagonista muy fuerte. Teniendo claro lo que significaría vivir en una dictadura, puedo deducir que nadie estaría contento de ser parte de esta, a menos que sea la minoría que tiene el poder en sus manos y la mayoría del tiempo esta beneficiada. En mi criterio al tener que decidir entre vivir en la dictadura alemana bajo el dominio de Adolf Hitler, y por el otro lado tener que vivir en la dictadura de la unión soviética bajo Stalin, escogería la dictadura alemana. Existen muchas razones por la que escogería, pero mi decisión también se ve afectada por bastantes variables que se tienen que aclarar a continuación. Primero podemos hablar sobre la diferencia ideológica y tipos de estado, que se puede decir que se les ve totalmente opuesta, de cada dictadura para que así yo pueda dar la primera razón que apoye mi decisión. La dictadura de Adolf Hitler se basaba en el fascismo, que posiblemente llego a ser la más famosa durante el mandato de Hitler. Se sabe que es un gobierno autoritario, muy violento y unipartidista en el país. Pero la característica más importante de su ideología era el ultranacionalismo que tenía no solo hacia el país en sí, si no hacia la raza aria. Lo manifiesta de esta manera “Cada vez que la sangre aria se mezcló con la de otros pueblos inferiores las consecuencias fue la destrucción de la raza portaestandarte de la cultura” (Hitler, 2003). No estoy en acuerdo con esta ideología de ultranacionalismo relacionado con la raza aria, ni el exterminio violento que se dio hacia algunos grupos minoritarios (Judíos, Gitanos, Homosexuales, etc.). Tampoco que los países deben ser únicamente dirigidos por un partido político, y sobre todo que controle todo con violencia. Pero la razón por la que prefiero esta dictadura, es porque nunca me gustó la ideología de Stalin. Stalin fue el sucesor en Rusia de Lenin, uno de los principales promotores y personas que llevaron a la práctica al comunismo. Sus ideas fueron basadas en el manifiesto comunista creado por Marx y Engels. Lo que principalmente pretende esta ideología es que el Estado controle todos los medios económicos, mediante la toma del poder del aparto productivo por parte de la clase trabajadora o proletaria. El objetivo de esto sería crear una igualdad entre toda la población y así crear la desaparición del estado como sí. Esta ideología también es basada en que tiene que ser un país unipartidista con el objetivo de que no tengan alguna fuerza que se les oponga. Al momento de decidirme por las dos ideologías, yo escogí la de Hitler, ya que los ideales que son creados por Marx en su manifiesto no son de mi agrado. No me parece que el estado tenga que tener una intervención tan fuerte en todos los aspectos de la vida de los ciudadanos, así mismo como la igualdad de todos. Cabe recalcar que no estoy de acuerdo con ninguna de las dos ideologías, pero teniendo que elegir una de las dos, la que más se relacionan y acercan a las mías son las de Hitler. Ahora bien, en cuanto a la economía que se manejó en las dos dictaduras si se encuentra una diferencia muy grande. Tengo una tendencia bastante fuerte sobre la liberación del mercado y de un capitalismo fuerte que creará prosperidad en un país. Si bien la Alemania de Hitler no se encontraba en una total libertad económica, se tenía un mayor respeto hacia la propiedad privada. Esto siempre y cuando no seas parte de una de las minorías a las cuales perseguía al estado, y tengas algún tipo de relación con los objetivos finales del régimen. En cambio, siendo parte de la dictadura de Stalin, la propiedad privada no sería respetada para nada. Yo tengo la creencia de que la propiedad privada no tiene que ser violada por parte del estado, ya que es fruto de los esfuerzos de las personas. Durante el tiempo que estuvieron a cargo estas dos dictaduras, como es una característica muy marcada, la violencia fue un problema muy grave dentro de estos países. Claro está que estos dos regímenes fueron personajes principales durante la segunda guerra mundial, pero la violencia no se vivía solo al afrontarse en contra de los enemigos, sino también entre sus habitantes. Siguiendo sus ideologías, Hitler, tomo bastantes acciones para poder asegurar el futuro de la raza aria. Esto significaba exterminar a los grupos que se les creía enemigos para Hitler. Por esta razón pasó una de las masacres más grandes de la historia contemporánea, que fue llamada la solución final. Pero se defendía siempre a las personas que eran afines al partido oficial, y también a personas que no tenían ningún problema con el estado. Por otro lado, en la dictadura de Stalin, también se defendía bastante a las personas que estaban a favor del gobierno estalinista y sus ideales. Sin embargo, para poder defenderse como dictadura, tuvieron que también eliminar a sus enemigos políticos y personas que estaban en contra de las acciones del estado. En mi punto de vista esto también sería una razón más para elegir a Alemania para vivir. Primero creo que se sentiría que estaría más seguro dentro de esta dictadura ya que, si eres un ciudadano alemán que no interviene en la política nacional no deberías tener problema con la leu ni ser perseguido. Al igual, si eres un ciudadano de la unión soviética que no tiene participación en la política ni apoyo alguno, no deberías tener ningún problema. Pero en mi punto de vista, Stalin nunca tuvo respeto por las vidas de sus ciudadanos. Porque aparte de los enemigos políticos que se sabe que si sería eliminados, existieron bastantes personas inocentes muertas por ordenes de su propio líder. Por ejemplo, toda esa gente que fue enviada hacia territorios cerca de la Siberia para que puedan hacer unos lugares aptos para la producción, pero al final no tuvieron posibilidad alguna de hacerlo. Es por esto que de alguna forma si siento que Hitler si se interesaba por el bienestar de habitantes, claro está que siempre bajo las normas y reglas de sus ideales políticos. Mientras que Stalin solo quería llegar a sus objetivos políticos sin dar mucha importancia el bienestar de su pueblo. Pero durante la época y por las circunstancias que estaban pasando estos dos países, era muy difícil estar en un ambiente seguro donde se pueda vivir en paz. Claro que es muy relativa la decisión que se tiene que tomar, ya que depende mucho del rol que vas a tener como individuo en cada una de las opciones. Por ejemplo, siendo un chico de mi edad (20 años) muy probablemente estaría enlistado en cualquiera de los dos ejércitos y listo para la guerra. Comparado con una persona que sea un alto funcionario del estado, que eran las personas que recibían los mayores lujos de atención, así sea en Alemania o en la Unión Soviética. Pero el rol más desafortunado que existieron durante estas dos dictaduras, era el de enemigo de estas, como enemigo político o solo una minoría racial. Por estas razones puedo decir que en mi decisión si es mucho más inclinada hacia la Alemania nazi que hacia el Comunismo de la Unión Soviética de Stalin. Las ideologías de ambas dictaduras no se acercan a las que yo considero como racionales ni parecidas a mi ideología, pero puedo decir que nunca me gusto el comunismo ni socialismo. Por mis creencias, tengo un fuerte respaldo a la libertad del mercado, sin intervención del estado, por eso nuevamente se convierte en una razón más para mi decisión. Por último me sentiría más seguro en Alemania, a comparación del miedo constante de las indecisiones del dictador Stalin.

Referencias:
- Sodaro, M. (2010). Política y Ciencia Política: Una Introducción. Editorial McGraw.
- Hitler, A. (2003). Mi Lucha. Editorial: FAPA ediciones.

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

History Final

...That is correct that Stalin ordered the burning of these books in order to erase Jewish culture in the Soviet Union. Although unlike Hitler, Stalin did not target the Jews as a race, he embraced anti-Semitic stereotypes at times, such as in the infamous doctor's plot. See http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Human_Rights/plot.html We learn from our text, that "Stalin forced writers and artists to use the techniques of approved 'socialist realism' for artistic and literary expression" (235). Do you think that this is comparable to the Nazi book burnings? I think Stalin, like Mark mentioned, enforced only areas of education which benefited his plans for the government and its people. There was a big change in the way that classes of people were treated; Stalin cared much less about women than the previous leader and he aimed to increase profits through industry for the already wealthy elite and the military (Goff, 2008). During this time he promoted education which would reinforce the values of hard work and discipline, but did very little for the people who worked just as hard as others, the farmers. They were living in poverty. I think that the only difference between Stalin and Hitler here is that Stalin's goals were centered around earning more wealth and making people more productive, though at the expense of certain classes' qualities of life. Hitler sought to "extinguish" an entire race of people, based on superior beliefs of a duty to cleanse the world...

Words: 1411 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Majo

...Nazi Soviet Pact Why did Stalin agree to a Non Aggression Pact with Hitler instead of an alliance with Britain and France? Starting this essay, it is important to clarify from the beginning when Stalin agrees to be part of the Nazi Pact. There are the mainly reason why did Stalin joined Hitler instead having an alliance with Britain and France. In these reasons it is include Stalin’s communist beliefs. He believed about the difference between fascist and democracies. His most important task was to ensure that Germany, Italy, Britain and France (capitalist countries and enemies of Soviet Union) did not unite each other to fight against USSR. The countries started to attack each other to gain more markets and materials. In this case, Stalin expected another war just like the First World War. He wants to ensure that USSR was saved in war among capitalist countries. Other important reason was the support for the League. The Soviet Minister tried to joined Britain and France, to corral Germany. Another reason, the Appeasement and the Soviets. The policy forced Stalin to think about the link with Britain and France, he never had trusted in both either. Stalin believed that the Nazis and the Soviet Union would destroy each other. There was a chance of war between France, Germany and Britain, and the problem with USSR was not in great conditions yet. It is very clear that Stalin wanted to be in the winning side, he figured out that British and French would come on top. But something...

Words: 534 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Ap Eh Ch 27 Notes

...Britain and France to oppose strongly flagrant German violations of the Treaty of Versailles A. The Role of Hitler 1. WW II in Europe had its beginnings in the ideas of Adolf Hitler, who believed that only Aryans were capable of building a great civilization 2. Hitler was a firm believer in the doctrine of Lebensraum which stated that a nation’s power depended on the amount and kind of land it occupied 3. Hitler thought that the Russian Revolution created conditions for Germany’s acquisition of land to its “racially inferior Slavic” east (Mein Kampf spelled out Hitler’s desire to expand eastward and to prepare for the inevitable war with the “Bolshevik Jew-led” Soviet Union) 4. Hitler always returned to his basic ideological plans for racial supremacy and empire as keys to the blueprint for achieving his goals 5. Hitler’s desire to create an Aryan empire led to slave labor and even mass extermination on a scale that would have been incomprehensible to previous generations of Germans (or anybody else outside of Uncle Joe’s reach) B. The “Diplomatic Revolution” (1933-1936) 1. between 1933 and 1936, Hitler and Nazi Germany achieved a diplomatic revolution in Europe 2. For Hitler, it was most important that Germany build a large army and seek to expand its territory a. Obstacles to Hitler 1. Treaty of Versailles created a demilitarized zone on...

Words: 5075 - Pages: 21

Premium Essay

Origins Of The Cold War Essay

...The Division of Europe The Origins of the Cold War The Soviet Union and the United States began to quarrel as soon as the threat of Germany disappeared and hostility between the Eastern and Western superpowers was a logical outgrowth of military developments, wartime agreements, and long-standing differences The Americans and British had made military victory their highest priority and avoided discussion of Stalin’s war aims and shape of the eventual peace settlement The United States and Britain did not try to take advantage of the Soviet Union’s position in 1942, because they feared that bargaining would encourage Stalin to consider making separate peace with Hitler (focused on unconditional surrender) The conference that Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill held in the Iranian capital of Teheran in November 1943 proved of crucial importance in...

Words: 480 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

History Term 2 Paper

...conference took place there was tension building up between the Allies and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was an ally with Germany for 2 years when they signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact; “this led the west to believe Stalin was cynical, opportunistic, power hungry, expansionist” (lecture, 1/8/16). It also took the allies a while to open up a western front, and this angered Stalin as the Soviet unions causalities kept on mounting. The conference was attended by the big three, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin and U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The leaders agreed to Germanys surrender and to set up spheres in occupied Germany that the three nations plus France would control (lecture 1/8/16). Stalin also agreed to free elections in Eastern Europe, however he fell short on his promise. Berlin Blockade/Airlift The Berlin Blockade was the first physical confrontation between the Soviet Union and the West (lecture 1/8/16). The blockade started on June 1948 to May 1949. The whole idea behind the Blockade was to force the western allies out of “Berlin by blocking all ground access to the city” (lecture, 1/8/16). This was possible because getting into Berlin you had to travel through Soviet occupied East Germany. The allies were able to get around the blockade by airlifting massive amounts of supplies to Berlin (lecture, 1/8/16). This was significant because it showed how the relations between the Soviet Union and the Allies have deteriorated...

Words: 1841 - Pages: 8

Free Essay

The Strong Who Leave Behind Morality

...German philosopher, brings forth the idea that the concept of morals is just an attempt by the people who have little power to limit the ones who has more or has all the power. Essentially he is referring to the idea that weaker part of society uses the idea of morals in order to prevent the ones who are powerful from doing anything they please and taking everything they desire. “Morality is an invention of the weak to limit the strong” What exactly discerns the difference between the ones who are strong and the ones who are weak? The strength of a person in this case is not how much weight a person can bench. The power in this case of is the power of connections, positions, wealth, and the fact that others have put the strong on a pedestal in the first place. The strong do not become strong simply because better. One needs to have the resolve to act, and take from others. Only the weak seem to experience loss, so the strong takes from others, even if it is to not gain more but lose less Adolf Hitler in the past had gained an influential position in Germany, and he rose to that position because everyone else decided to follow him. He has all his power and influence because he had left behind the morals that hold back power. He did terrible things to the Jewish and yet no one thought that he was wrong because they had also left behind part of their morality. He convinced them that the reason Germany lost the war because of the existence of the Jews. They believed him;...

Words: 882 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

The Ethics Of Abusive Behavior In Leadership

...The Ethics of Abusive Behavior in Leadership When determining the ethical, or unethical, stance of a situation, one must understand what ethics refers to and that each person has his or her own value system. Ethics is the analyzation of the morality, or beliefs, of a person, group, society, culture, etc. The standards by which a person formulates morals can be by a variety of circumstances and acquaintances in life, generally beginning in adolescent years when a child learns the difference between right and wrong. Adults face situations every day where ethics are involved, especially those in leadership positions. As history has shown, the line dividing right and wrong is obscure for some leaders who display abusive behaviors. Through the course of this paper, the ethics of abusive behavior in a variety of leadership positions will be critiqued as well as history of abusive behaviors in leadership and warning signs for preventative measures. Abusive Behavior...

Words: 1614 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Steven Pinker's TED Talk

...Unlike Hitler, who openly murdered the Jews, Stalin’s involvement in the murder of millions are the results of political decisions, terror, and oppression. Stalin’s notions of “collectivizing” Russia would “destroy” the “autonomy” Russia’s peasant had established since the Russian revolution (Keefe, pg.1). A push to make Russia industrialized and the decisions that were made by Stalin would have devastating effects on the people of Russia. The main reason why Russian leaders had serious incentives to make their economy stronger was to rival Western economies, but unlike the West, Russia had forced its citizens to do what their told to make this a reality (Keefe, pg.1). At the time Stalin was in office he had proposed two five-year plans to transition Russia into a modern industrial economy, however, it came the expense of brutal oppression, forced labor, and millions of deaths to all which initially were spread through propaganda messages that incited national pride among many and was in a sense “successful” in achieving “increased production” but would come at the cost of devastating the...

Words: 2457 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

The Cold War

...Does the Cold War have its roots in the period prior to WW11? There are many reasons to believe that the seed of conflict between the west and east was planted before the Second War World had begun. Amongst them being factors of ideological differences, agreements such Brest-Litovsk treaty and the Russian Civil War. Other less significant causes being USSR dishonouring their debts they owed to western countries like France as well as the murder of the Tsars. However, it should be asserted how even with these factors there was still a substantial reason for the allied countries to be able to have stable relationship if other causes in the later future after the second war did not occur. These later causes include agreements such as the Nazi-Soviet Pact and Chamberlain’s Appeasement Policy. Events such as these helped increase tensions between the USSR and the USA as well as bringing the conflict into more focus and attention by two parties, causing increased mistrust and panic from both sides. This query will examine whether the Cold War did indeed have its roots in the period before War World Two and if so then to what extent are the factors significant as causes. Starting with the causes prior to the second war, one of the biggest and initial disputes between USSR and the other allies were their differing ideologies. USSR’s values as a communist state were entirely different to the capitalism of the West. Unlike Capitalism, communism supported closed economy in which trading...

Words: 964 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

How Far Do You Agree with the View That Stalin’s Foreign Policy Was a Major Contributing Factor to the Emergence of the Cold War in the Period 1945-50?

...emergence of the cold war. One of these was Stalin and his aggressive foreign policy; another key factor to be considered is the American paranoia and resultant aggression at the time. Which of these factors was more significant is debatable but it is undeniable that soviet foreign policy was a major contributor to the outbreak of the Cold War. One of the key elements that led to the cold war was Stalin's expansionist foreign policy, with ideas “to dominate the continent as Hitler had sought to do so”. This view from American historian Gaddis shows the view of many Americans during the period; it highlights just how threatened the USA felt and demonstrates how pivotal Stalin's expansionist views were in the outbreak of war, his zeal and resolve to control the continent conjured fear in the Americans and source T shows that Stalin would use any means necessary. Such actions so as to cease control in Europe would not go without reaction from America and actions such as the communist coup d’état in Czechoslovakia would not go unnoticed. They were met with resistance; both the Marshall plan and Truman doctrine were arguably the response to soviet aggression. The Marshall plan aimed to prevent the further spread of communism particularly into Western Europe following the principle that ‘poverty breads communism’ and the Truman Doctrine outlined preventative measures to be taken. These only further fuelled the ideological battle between the two superpowers with continual responses...

Words: 852 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Joseph Stalin

...Joseph (Dzhughashvili) Stalin accomplished many achievements for the Russia people during his life time, unfortunately at the expense of many lives, and others he sent into exile, in gulag camps in Siberia. He was born in Gori, Georgia, the son of a poor shoemaker in 1879. Like most young Russian men, of Stalin time, he struggled to find his way, but after much hardship in Georgia. He grew to be anti-government and the Marxist ideas were his new found believes. Stalin elected President after Lenin death in 1924. “The Russian Revolution was a war between the Bolshevik (Red Guard), communist, and Mensheviks (White Guard)”, Frazee, C. A. p179. Joseph Stalin fought in the civil war Bolshevik, standing strong on his ideals of socialism was the only way Russian would survive. His authoritarian rule forced the Russian people to believe as he did that socialism the right way and capitalism was wrong. While Stalin was in power, his ruling strategies industrialized the country, communized their agriculture, and he made Russia a more active country on international affairs, he lead his country to a superpower. The early years of Stalin were the foundational years that gave him the true since of poverty, “an uptown boy, he distinguished himself in fighting, in Russian of the late 1880 and early 1890, Stalin at the age of fifteen adopted the Marxist ways” Davies, S. and Harris J P30. The ideas of Marxism, in the beginning, remained blind to the majority of Georgian’s country men. He attended...

Words: 1341 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

As a Leader, Is It Better to Be Feared, or Revered?

...revered? Leadership attributes, skills, and styles are the driving forces to lead others to successful mission accomplishment. Good leadership is based on these fundamental, unchanging qualities, such as competence, character, and a profound sense of responsibility. Styles of leadership may vary over time or may evolve with changing circumstances, but these bedrock qualities are foundations of a leaders' substance. Profiling historic leaders shows how these qualities are embodied by these leaders. Even with these qualities being present in all successful leaders, they can still be perceived as either feared or revered. It stands in good contention that successful leaders, whether feared or revered possessed the same qualities. The differences in the perception, is in how the leaders deployed their leadership philosophies. Many leaders are revered by their followers, and feared by their enemies, as where other leaders are feared by their followers. Keywords: Leaders, leadership. As a Leader, is it Better to be Feared, or Revered? Machiavelli believed that a great leader should be feared rather than loved. A midstream conservative approach is to say that it’s better to be both loved and feared, but we know in all reality that this is a nearly unattainable state. An optimistic view would be to think that it would be possible to be that consummate leader, someone to be feared and loved at the same time. A review of historical leaders will show that it is possible, but...

Words: 3631 - Pages: 15

Premium Essay

How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Period 1945-50 Was the Result of Stalin’s Foreign Policy?

...Cold War, in the five years between 1945 and 1950, could be argued as taking place for a number of reasons and due to various individuals. It could be easy to simply site Stalin as the main reason responsible for it’s outbreak and growth, clear through his approach on communist expansion, use of Red Army and inability to uphold agreements. However for a war of any kind to develop there is always more than one party involved and the USA and it’s president Truman could also be said to have contributed to the developing of Cold War, arguably being equally aggressive as Stalin – taking an Iron fist on dealings with Russia through policies such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, as well as his direction over the US involvement in the Korean War. However issues such as Britain and Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech, as well as the birth of McCarthyism in America, can also be seen as hindering relations between the two superpowers of the Cold War and therefore playing a role in it’s development. Whether Stalin was to blame for the Cold War can also be judged and evaluated through the use of sources, offering a number of interpretations, from extreme Orthodox and Revisionist views to the more diplomatic reasonings of the post revisionist stance. It is correct to say that development of the Cold War, between 1945 and 50, was definitely impacted and heightened through provocative, and at times, aggressive actions on foreign policy, taken by Stalin. An example of Stalin’s confrontational...

Words: 3132 - Pages: 13

Premium Essay

The Development of the Cold War Between the Usa and the Soviet Union Between 1945-53 Was Primarily Due to Traditional Great Power Rivalry

...development of the cold war between the USA and the Soviet Union between 1945-53 was primarily due to traditional great power rivalry The USA and the Soviet Union worked together to defeat Hitler in WW2. Towards the end of the war relationships between them began to break down, although in 1945 there remained possibility of continued cooperation. By 1947, this prospect had disappeared and tensions between the two powers continued to increase for the rest of this period. Some historians, including those belonging to the economic revisionist school of thought, argue that traditional great power rivalry was primarily responsible for this development. This is defined as developing power through trade in order to achieve financial dominance. Undoubtedly, this factor was a major contributor to cold war tensions, however other factors such as ideology, individuals and WW2- many of which are invariably linked to economic influence- also played a large part.   Great power rivalry can be seen as the main cause of increased cold war tensions between 1945 and 1953 as both powers sought to increase their relationships with other countries to obtain economic dominance. America, although benefitting economically from the war, feared the possibility of a recession, both as demand for arms fell and poverty in Europe threatened an insufficient international demand for US goods. They believed free trade would prevent this from happening, as well as increasing interdependence between countries, making further...

Words: 1461 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Owens Essay

... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The three great allies of the Second World War, the United Kingdom, the United States and Russia together destroyed the Axis powers and shattered their imperial ambitions. Their "shotgun marriage" 1 was always unlikely, given the history of antagonism between them. The union was to be short lived, with the ideological and political differences leading to the collapse of the Grand Alliance within five years of the end of the war. Despite wartime hopes that the great allies may be able to continue in their relationship in peace and provide stability to the world community, the diplomatic and military relationship between the two dominant powers, the United States and Russia, quickly degenerated into the so-called 'Cold War' which was to dominate world politics for the next half a century. [Listen to Owen talk about presenting an argument] [Listen to Owen talk about writing intros] During the war the allied leaders were aware that victory in Europe and the Pacific meant much more than just the abolition of an intolerable political regime. Talking in 1944, Stalin said: "This war is not as in the past; whoever occupies a territory also imposes on it his own social system. Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army has power to do so. It cannot be otherwise." 2 Consequently, as the threat of Nazism in Europe was clearly destined for defeat, the attention of the allies turned to post-war...

Words: 2067 - Pages: 9