A Critique of Dictator Propaganda

In the Russian Revolution and the Chinese revolution, there were two common threads and those were Communism and dictators. In these two communist countries there were unrelenting and unbending rulers: Mao Zedong and Joesph Stalin. In the Chinese revolution, Mao held China tightly in his fists. He was unrelenting in policies and at one point had almost absolute control of China. The same happened in Russia, Stalin was overbearing and dominant. He harshly and rigidly inflicted his will upon the people of Russia. With Stalin and Mao being such fierce rulers it brings me to the questions: why did Stalin and Mao, who neglected the opinion of others, care so much about how people perceived them? What was the purpose of pro-Stalin propaganda and pro-Mao propaganda?

In my opinion, I believe that Stalin and Mao did not necessarily care about what people thought about them, but rather what their supporters perceived they were doing with their power. In Stalin propoganda, there are visuals of productivity and happiness. Despite the oppression going on in Stalin-ruled Russia, Stalin always tried to project to his international supporters (country leaders envious of Russia's productivity during the Great Depression) that Russia was not only effective but it was what the ideal of what Russia's people expected out of government. Stalin's use of propaganda was to project a positive image of Russia to the world, which unfortunately did not reflect the actuality.

The same can be said of Mao. Mao constantly projected himself as the Red Sun that will guide China. Mao painted himself (literally) as the savior of China. In my opinion, the purpose of Mao's propaganda was to convince his supporters (the peasants) that despite the constant risk of imprisonment and famine, he was still somehow helping the people gain a China that was productive like the West and family oriented. Mao's propaganda generally served to convince his people that despite the harsh reality of China under Mao, that his methods will lead them to happiness and prosperity. Mao and Stalin used propaganda to basically hide the dark reality of life under their rule.

Mohandas Gandhi: A Long-term Success

Gandhi, the man responsible for leading a revolution in the footsteps of nonviolence, setting a precedents for generations to come, and the icon of peace thought himself to be a failure. Gandhi despite many successful protests like the Salt March, believed that he was a failure simply because he (a normal human being) could not prevent the partition of India and Pakistan. Gandhi took this burden upon his shoulders in the belief that he failed humanity, but what he fails to understand is that humanity failed him. He was one man trying to change the minds of many strong-willed individuals and because he could not cause them to waver in their support of the partition, he died believing that he was a failure.

With all respect to Gandhi, I staunchly disagree; Gandhi in no way was a failure. Gandhi was a teacher. Teaching was his only responsibility. He taught at his own expense and dedicated his life to sharing his message of satyagraha, civil disobedience, noncooperation, and most importantly peace. He sacrificed everything to teach, even spending several years in jail to ensure that his goal was reached; he cannot be held liable for the fact that his teaching apparently fell on deaf ears. In my opinion Gandhi in no way failed. He held up his part of the bargain, but his students did not hold theirs.

Above all, someone with Gandhi's international iconic status should not even be considered a failure. Years after his death, people still follow in his traditions of peaceful resistance. Even our country, America, learned from Gandhi and took into account his principles as shown with Martin Luther King Jr and the Civil Rights Movements. He is also a world wide symbol of peace. He is in literature, film, and even o stamps. His enormous impact after death is no short of remarkable; a failure could not achieve this much.

What do you believe? Do you beleive that someone with the accomplishments of Gandhi, world wide appeal and iconic status is a failure? Or do you feel that because he could not do the impossible and prevent partition that Gandhi was a failure?