Propaganda and Its Influence: Mao and Stalin

        

   

     

      In Mao’s China, propaganda greatly contributed to his public image as a ruler and also a godlike figure. As we were introduced to various pictures displaying severely exaggerated images of idyllic Chinese life, I thought of the propaganda that Russian dictator Joseph Stalin used to control and deceive the nation from the true political situation at hand.  Although for the most part the secrets that Stalin hid from the citizens, which were heavily replaced by idealistic pro-Stalin propaganda, were more severe than Mao’s secrets, both dictators utilized the same techniques to lead their followers under the false pretenses that all was beyond perfect in their respective nations.  In both cases, propaganda could be said to be the saving grace of both leaders.  Stalin and Mao each hid the problems in their countries, replacing them with posters declaring that all was flourishing and pleasant, politically and socially.  While famine flooded Russia, and oppressed citizens all around the countryside in the camps were dying more and more every day, Stalin kept it secret.  Instead, to boost his public image, he issued propaganda supporting him.  This propaganda, along with the cult of personality, made an idol out of Stalin, naming him as the reason for all good things in the world.  He even went so far as to create his approved line of art.  Soviet art, as it is called now, included images of Stalin standing in a utopian setting with young children, which made the citizens imagine him as a nurturing, kind leader when in fact thousands of men, women and children were starving and dying from the effects of his land collectivization labor camp program.  Mao, when his attempts to industrialize in the Great Leap Forward failed and mass famine and poverty struck China, instead issued posters with images depicting smiling, happy women participating in the industrialization.  Like Stalin, he also used the cult of personality, through propaganda prasing himself as China’s ‘savior’.  Extreme idolatry was used to depict Mao, including many images of him with a sun around his head, similar to a godlike radiating light.  Propaganda, I believe, was the thing that saved both dictators.  Even when everything was not running smoothly, the propaganda that they created made everyone believe that things were perfect.  By instilling such ideas that were so contradictory to the truth, they kept the people under their iron grips.  By making the people believe that they were their ‘saviors’ per se through propaganda, the people were inclined not to question them.  Since the people believed that Mao and Stalin were perfect, they never fought back.  And therefore, since the people never fought back, Stalin and Mao were able to rule for such long periods of time without anyone calling them into question.  

Gandhi and Satygraha-Failed Cause or Hopeless Cause?

 

In 1947, as the Partition of India ravaged the infant nation of India, it seemed as though Gandhi's mission of achieving a peaceful India free from British rule had failed.  India was now divided into India and Pakistan, religious dissent finally overruling the cause of unity.   But as Gandhi and his followers tried to settle with the fact that their plan of achieving peace and unity through satyagraha had failed, one could wonder if their hopes to attain such a goal were hopeless from the start.  Between the religious tension between the Muslims and the Hindus and the accompanying political strife that resulted, the tensions involved with Britain, and everything else, India was at a vulnerable place.  To campaign for peaceful unity was almost unrealistic, and doomed.  Why would such a struggling, overwrought populace be willing for a peaceful campaign?  It is true that violence is the easiest route, then.  India needed a quick and simple way to gain independence, and Gandhi’s way just wasn’t quick enough.  He didn’t allow for the Partition, and didn’t fully take into account the demands that Muslims had made, and their intentions to follow through as well.  With such religious tension that ended up literally dividing India, it was impossible to achieve an easy, peaceful transition.  Sometimes, violence is necessary.  The utopian view that Gandhi idolized could work, yes, but not in the situation that India was in.  Ultimately, the violence and death that finally resulted was inevitable. Like water furiously bubbling and boiling underneath a pot cover, the cover could not just be quickly removed without expecting steam to arise. The giant pot cover of Britain suppressed the people of India. Not only was the water stuck under the pot, it was boiling inside the pot.  After the pot cover was lifted off, an explosion occurred rather predictably.  Therefore, unfortunately, Gandhi’s hopes for a peaceful transition were impossible.  With the religious and political tension in India and the transition from suppression to freedom, violence, sadly, was inevitable.

image source: the40yearplan.com