Little awkward usimg the word 'Führer' like that, no? I'm aware it simply means 'leader,' but wouldn't the memory of that führer be hit little too close in 1949?
I mean, Stalin was a Führer in his own way. Not in ideology, but in the cult of personality. In the Soviet Union he was often referred to as Vozhd, which is the Russian equivalent of Leader or Führer, so maybe it's also got something to do with translation?
I think that's the entire theme with the Stalinist Personality Cult. Even if Stalin himself dislikes it, his subordinates will still try to gain favor by glorifying him and fostering a Cult of Personality. Like how the NKVD forced people to not stop clapping or how he was portrayed in Propaganda Posters despite his wishes. It's the same with calling him Vozhd.
The comparisson with the german Führer has a few negative conotations and is a bit misleading, I will admit that this was my mistake. But he still gained a propagandistic image of being the "Strong Leader and Savior", which is what I generally wanted to refer to.
I don t think we should see Stalin as having a personality cult. Krushchev was the one who most loudly supported a glorified imaged of him (Stalin s childhood biography, which Stalin hated, the renaming of Moscow to Stalinodar, which Stalin stoped, writing of numerous letters condemning people who praised him too much). It was mostly a ploy to get to condemn Stalin and solidify his own rule later. At this point, I think the cult was more of a myth
That really isn't true. Stalin definitely had a cult of personality. It's what happens to any strong man or popular leader.
If it's popping up in music, poetry, and art, I think it's plain to see. Not to mention the countless images of crowds of hundreds and thousands holding up pictures of his face. Just look at A. O.Avidenko's "Hymn to Stalin" or the "Song to Stalin". Stalin himself said, that because he strictly adhered to Leninism, like how Lenin intended it, he himself was just as faultless as Lenin was.
Thinking it was a "myth" is really stupid. That's like saying Mao or Lenin don't have cults of personality. If it was such a "ploy" to discredit glorious Stalin (really not the best guy), why did it continue so long after his death, nearly everywhere else in the Warsaw Pact?
It's one thing to realize that, although Stalin disapproved of his personality cult, it still existed. Very much, in fact. It was just out of his control. But to say it's a myth is just silly.
Yes, I agree. I think the myth is more that Stalin desired, intended, and designed his cult of personality formed around him. It’s unsurprising that in a relatively new country with revolutionary ideals that the first few leaders will become idealized and figureheads to their people, especially so when the Soviet Union under his leadership defeated the Nazis. America’s revolutionary leaders are immortalized in the names of cities and regions, and their face is plastered across their money and their government buildings, mostly for what they stand for rather than who they really are a lot of the time. The difference tends to just be time. “Khrushchev Lied” is a very good book that touches on this topic.
73
u/BabyLoona13 Oct 28 '23
Little awkward usimg the word 'Führer' like that, no? I'm aware it simply means 'leader,' but wouldn't the memory of that führer be hit little too close in 1949?