The Independence of Uzbekistan Was Good for the Uzbeks Even Though They Have Basically the Same System of Government as in the Soviet Union

Throughout the period 1855 to 1954, opposition to Russian governments was a common occurrence due to dissatisfaction of many civilians’ lives and the lack of development seen throughout Russia. However, as much as there were some successful movements throughout 1905 such as the Bolsheviks gaining support and eventually gaining power, there were also several failed attempts due to intense use of violence, terror and censorship by the state. It is arguable that whether opposition was successful, merely came down to the strength of the opposition group or the weakness of the government in power.

De Waal, T. (2002). Greetings from Gozny. Fighting for Chechnya: Is Islam a factor? Retrieved

Ukraine’s hope and will was in the hands of the dictator Joseph Stalin. Joseph Stalin instilled a totalitarian government into Ukraine’s society. Moreover, Stalin tried to cut any threats that would affect his plan in making Russia a communist utopia, by using the secret police. But according to document 1, the Ukrainian’s were independent, rebellious people who believed strongly in their culture and traditional ways consequently, this caused much controversy with Joseph Stalin and the Ukrainian’s, such as Ukrainian’s not being able to speak up about the collectivization and not being able to practice different religions because of Russification. Likewise, Stalin used propaganda for in an effort of gaining support for collectivization, this

Russia, as a country, has had a long and proud history. However, for a small time starting in 1917, things started to take a turn for the worse. There was widespread famine, disease, and killing by the instituted government. There was also no Russia. Instead, there was the glorious United Soviet Socialist Republics, or the USSR. This new country did not come around peacefully, but instead under the 1917 Russian Revolution and the revolting communist Bolsheviks. The Russian people were not in a better condition after the Russian revolution due to Stalin’s leadership of his country; the reason being the GULAGs that Stalin was sending his people to, the communes that the peasants were sent to, and the disastrous effects of his five year plans.

On December 5, 1936, the Soviet Union adopted a new constitution to reform the government. It replaced the 1924 constitution that was ratified shortly after the death of Vladimir Lenin. The 1936 constitution lasted until 1977, when a new constitution was adopted. According to a former kulak named Andrei Arzhilovsky, people celebrated on the streets when the constitution was ratified, and everyone called it the “Stalin Constitution”. Rightfully so, it deserved the name because Josef Stalin was heavily involved in the creation of the new constitution. Indeed there were good reasons for Soviet citizens to celebrate the adoption of the new constitution, because it granted rights that were previously denied to the people. Among the rights that were provided were: (1) universal rights for all Soviet citizens including kulaks (2) freedom of religion (3) preservation of the rights of all ethnic groups. In this paper, I will argue that the 1936 Soviet Constitution did not achieve its goal of providing universal rights to all Soviet citizens,

In 2010, A coup was attempted by supporters of the ousted president. This followed the first election under the new constitution which didn’t give an outright winner. In 2011, there was a peaceful election that resulted in the winner having sixty percent of the vote. Since 2012, there has been a lot of issues such as political corruption, suicide bombings, and state treason. They do have another election in October 2017.

The concept of Stalinism, being the ideologies and policies adopted by Stalin, including centralization, totalitarianism and communism, impacted, to an extent, on the soviet state until 1941. After competing with prominent Bolshevik party members Stalin emerged as the sole leader of the party in 1929. From this moment, Stalinism pervaded every level of society. Despite the hindrance caused by the bureaucracy, the impact of Stalinism was achieved through the implementation of collectivization and the 5-year plans, Stalin’s Political domination and Cultural influence, including the ‘Cult of the Personality’. This therefore depicts the influence of Stalinism over the Soviet State in the period up to 1941.

The authors of The Bridge Betrayed and The Buddhas of Bamiyan both identify a different form of cultural eradication that occurred in within the past twenty-five years. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Serbs and Croats wanted to destroy the Bosnian Muslim symbols, culture, and population. In Afghanistan, the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas of Bamiyan, and in turn, changed the identity of Bamiyan forever. The practice of cultural eradication is not limited to these two cases. Cultural eradication has taken place throughout history involving one group’s desire to transform, absorb, and destroy a particular culture and its’ values. The desire for destruction may seem similar, however, the individual agendas that drive the eradication vary in each instance. Michael Sells explores the nationalism that is expressed by the Serbs and Croats in Bosnia that he refers to as Christoslavism. Llewlyn Morgan discusses the Taliban’s iconoclastic and political motivations to destroy the Buddhas. Both examples ultimately analyze some of the many dimensions of cultural eradication in the world.

These mass genocides were used by totalitarian states to achieve ultra-nationalism as those who refused to assimilate into Stalin’s

Before the nation of Russia became the international powerhouse that we knew as the USSR, it was first the small backwater country, whose economy ran on the use of serfs, Czar 's ruled every aspect, and the chance of growth was limited; however, once the year 1917 came along, the entire aspect of what was to be the Russia nation changed into a very strange and new one, called the United of Soviet Socialist Republics. The Soviet Union was, at one point, second only to the United States of America and had the power to destroy the entire planet with the single acknowledgement of their leader, because of their nuclear capabilities and their political power. The Russian country became the great Communist powerhouse after a great revolution in

In order to conclude the extent to which the Great Terror strengthened or weakened the USSR the question is essentially whether totalitarianism strengthened or weakened the Soviet Union? Perhaps under the circumstances of the 1930s in the approach to war a dictatorship may have benefited the country in some way through strong leadership, the unifying effect of reintroducing Russian nationalism and increased party obedience.

The emergence of the Islamic Republic in late 1970’s Iran demonstrates how middle class Iranian people purged themselves of the Pahlavi Dynasty in an effort to continue down a more righteous and egalitarian path. As a result, the country underwent a complete social upheaval and in its place grew an overtly oppressive regime based in theoretical omnipotence. In response to this regime, the very structure of political and social life was shaken and fundamentally transformed as religion and politics became inexorable. As a result, gender roles and the battle between public and private life were redrawn. Using various primary and secondary sources I will show how the Revolution shaped secular middle class Iranians. Further, I will show how the

On April 8, 1929, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR) came forward with their Criminal Code of the RSFSR which laid out how religious entities would be like as Stalin came into prominent power. The first tenant of the code showed the theme of the new direction of religion under Stalin. “…The separation of the church from the state and of the school from the church shall apply to churches, religious groups, movements, trends and all other associations for religious worship of all denominations.” Secularism was the new way a life in the USSR as the church went away from the Orthodox teachings of the past. The code also goes into how religious societies or groups had to register and could be a part of more than one of these societies or groups. These groups also could not practice their religion without permission, couldn’t collect donations, and if liquidated, a church would have to give up items of value to the state. This goes on for sixty-six adjustments to society and religion’s role within it.

Instead, the regime programmed people with the notion of social order, with traditional attitudes to great power, superiority and history, “Orthodoxy” the primary religion of the state and military. The area where politics and civil society should have been was "purged" decreasing the rights of citizens unknowingly. “If participation were not contained, the Kremlin feared the state would lose control; if the constraints were too tight, citizens would not participate, and the state would again need a cumbersome bureaucracy to get things done” (Richter 41). Political parties, independent television channels, non governmental and public organizations, the system of elections, the courts and law-enforcement bodies as autonomous bodies

Uzbekistan is a former soviet bloc country in the central Eurasia region. It was a functioning member of the USSR from 1924 all the way until the fall of the Gorbachev administration in 1991. Since then it has struggled with the formation of a functioning democratic system within its own borders. It has formed what appears to be a form of the famous multi-representative democratic system, modeled after the system birthed by the United States. However, it has done poorly at that and has descended into what could be accurately characterized as a single party state, masked from that definition by shady bureaucratic technicalities. The president of Uzbekistan, Islom Karimov, has unconstitutionally sustained his presidency since the formation of the democratic system. He holds an inordinate amount of power with the ability to supersede both the legislative branch through dissolution and the judiciary branch by blatant executive power. He has diminished opposition by allowing only parties that support him in elections, and only voters that are registered to those parties. Furthermore, Karimov has eliminated the right to protest, resulting in the arrest of many and even the death of some unlucky dissenters. Because of the amount of power the president holds, other political officials exist solely to uphold the wishes of the executive branch, with little power to do much of