reality of the Stalin regime in the Soviet Union

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
The Reality of the Stalin Regime in the Soviet Union
Russia had developed several problems, and Stalin realized that he had to solve two main issues first. One was that there was not enough food for the USSR and the peasants were not producing adequate funds to advance the industry sector. Two, the industrial sector in Russia was not rapidly developing, which slowed the country’s development into a communist superpower. Stalin’s Soviet Union embraced peace, improvement, and mostly endless care for and loyalty to Stalin. Centuries have passed, and generations still regard him as a fortunate and inspirational leader. Through his era, Russia developed to a significant industrial state by 1939 and her development was unequaled in the time of the Depression in the U. S and Western Europe, which recorded an enormous increase in the unemployment rate (Cheremukhin, Anton, Mikhail Golosov, Sergei Guriev, and Aleh Tsyvinski 3). Although the citizens suffered significantly through Stalin’s sovereignty, they were dependable to him, and Stalin’s situation as leader was always in power. The people loved him, he brought prosperity to the people, and he cared for them,
Stalin’s care for his people could be seen when he accomplished improved working terms for well-rewarded skilled employees, and the country recorded a low unemployment rate in his time. Those employees who never offended the nation had a better life than those workers under the supremacy of the Tsar (Cheremukhin, Anton, Mikhail Golosov, Sergei Guriev, and Aleh Tsyvinski 1).

Russia’s armed forces were gaining from her industrial developments, which was also possible due to a stable administration under Stalin. Individuals could access much improved medical care even before the introduction of the National Health Service.
The living standards increased in the 30’s regardless of the noticeable troubles that the country had with food production and other deficits elsewhere. Some groups performed well out of the scheme particularly party officials and experienced factory employees. Health care system was significantly developed. Before, the inferior individuals in the country could not have anticipated certified medical assistance when ill (Cheremukhin, Anton, Mikhail Golosov, Sergei Guriev, and Aleh Tsyvinski 4). Now proper health care was available although the demand for it was very high. The number of health centers rose significantly, but there is proof that the doctors were so afraid of mistakes. Stalin’s educational plan can be summarized in his first educational rule: It is the responsibility of every school pupil to obtain knowledge persistently to be a knowledgeable and cultured individual and offer the greatest probable services to his/her nation (Cheremukhin, Anton, Mikhail Golosov, Sergei Guriev, and Aleh Tsyvinski 4). For the reason of this novel education system established, illiteracy dropped: By 1939, of citizens between the age of 9-49, approximately 94% in cities and 86% in the rural areas were literate.
In conclusion, Stalin’s influence on Russia was significant and vital. He might have sustained Lenin’s plans; however, he was the one who changed the country forever. He transformed the nation into a world power and a contemporary industrial state. Besides, he did this efficiently and fast and in thirty years. When he assumed the government after Lenin’s death, the country was almost crumbling, but Stalin rebuilt it through his harsh though the efficient strategy of collectivization and industrialization. Different from Lenin, Stalin’s supremacy over the country demonstrated more improvements, which was necessary for the nation to develop into what it is at present. However, he did this through Lenin’s foundation. Under Stalin’s regime, significant advances emerged in education and health. The people’s living standards increased as well. It was Stalin’s strategies and power on Russia that aided the USSR to succeed the Second World War. Nevertheless, his plans were the reason for many horror and million died, and it was inevitable when the country was to progress as a state in such a small period.
Work Cited
Cheremukhin, Anton, Mikhail Golosov, Sergei Guriev, and Aleh Tsyvinski. Was Stalin Necessary for Russia’s Economic Development? Cambridge, Mass: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2013.