國立虎尾科技大學 |

De-Stalinization and De-Maoization : = Leadership and Succession in Institutionalizing Leninist Regimes (Communism, Soviet Union, China).

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	De-Stalinization and De-Maoization :/
Reminder of title:	Leadership and Succession in Institutionalizing Leninist Regimes (Communism, Soviet Union, China).
Author:	Paltiel, Jeremy Tim.
Description:	1 online resource (537 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 45-07, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International45-07A.
Subject:	Political science. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798205132558

De-Stalinization and De-Maoization : = Leadership and Succession in Institutionalizing Leninist Regimes (Communism, Soviet Union, China).
Paltiel, Jeremy Tim.

De-Stalinization and De-Maoization :Leadership and Succession in Institutionalizing Leninist Regimes (Communism, Soviet Union, China). - 1 online resource (537 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 45-07, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Berkeley, 1984.

Includes bibliographical references

This dissertation examines authority in Leninist regimes and the role of leadership in transforming it. The central factor mediating authority relations both inside the Party and between the Party and society is the presence of a unique Leninist combat culture. This forms the basis of Party cohesion, binding both the Party leadership and the cadres. It must be adapted by leaders to the changing social environment and developmental tasks confronting the Party. The comparison of developmental patterns in China and the Soviet Union demonstrates that despite continued cultural differences, it is factors within the Communist Party, and in particular its combat culture, that generate these developmental patterns. The dissertation discusses how Party leaders establish personal authority inside the Party by reference to the combat culture. During periods of succession, authority must be bid for and won to maintain social and organizational cohesion. This causes the most significant changes in authority relations take place. New leadership emerges on the basis of forging a new line, adapting the Party to a changed environment. "Power struggles" are analyzed with the objective of elucidating their meaning and relevance for the system of authority. Political leaders establish new authority patterns, but in turn, they are constrained by the Party culture. To set the stage for a comparison changing authority patterns in the Soviet Union and China, chapter I examines the enduring definitions of authority which Lenin built into the Communist Party. We show how these formed the basic pattern in the Communist Party of China as well. Chapter II introduces the relevance of successions to changes in authority patterns and the ways in which Stalin adapted the Leninist combat culture to the task of state building as well as to build his own authority. Chapter III is an examination of the cult of personality. We explain why this phenomenon, in both the Soviet Union and China, is a consequence of the combat culture and discuss the differences in authority patterns between the two. The second half of the dissertation examines the impact of the succession following the cult of personality on the Leninist regime. Chapter IV looks at Khrushchev through the relationship of de-Stalinization to the changing pattern of authority in the Soviet Union. Chapter V is a detailed study of authority changes in China after Mao, related to the rise of Deng Xiaoping. The conclusion summarises these changes, to make clear the new relationship of the Party to the social structure.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798205132558Subjects--Topical Terms:

558774
Political science.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

De-Stalinization and De-Maoization : = Leadership and Succession in Institutionalizing Leninist Regimes (Communism, Soviet Union, China).
LDR:03831ntm a22003137 4500 001 1142310
005 20240416125351.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s1984 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798205132558
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI8512949
035 $a AAI8512949
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Paltiel, Jeremy Tim. $3 1466592
245 1 0 $a De-Stalinization and De-Maoization : $b Leadership and Succession in Institutionalizing Leninist Regimes (Communism, Soviet Union, China).
264 0 $c 1984
300 $a 1 online resource (537 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 45-07, Section: A.
500 $a Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Berkeley, 1984.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a This dissertation examines authority in Leninist regimes and the role of leadership in transforming it. The central factor mediating authority relations both inside the Party and between the Party and society is the presence of a unique Leninist combat culture. This forms the basis of Party cohesion, binding both the Party leadership and the cadres. It must be adapted by leaders to the changing social environment and developmental tasks confronting the Party. The comparison of developmental patterns in China and the Soviet Union demonstrates that despite continued cultural differences, it is factors within the Communist Party, and in particular its combat culture, that generate these developmental patterns. The dissertation discusses how Party leaders establish personal authority inside the Party by reference to the combat culture. During periods of succession, authority must be bid for and won to maintain social and organizational cohesion. This causes the most significant changes in authority relations take place. New leadership emerges on the basis of forging a new line, adapting the Party to a changed environment. "Power struggles" are analyzed with the objective of elucidating their meaning and relevance for the system of authority. Political leaders establish new authority patterns, but in turn, they are constrained by the Party culture. To set the stage for a comparison changing authority patterns in the Soviet Union and China, chapter I examines the enduring definitions of authority which Lenin built into the Communist Party. We show how these formed the basic pattern in the Communist Party of China as well. Chapter II introduces the relevance of successions to changes in authority patterns and the ways in which Stalin adapted the Leninist combat culture to the task of state building as well as to build his own authority. Chapter III is an examination of the cult of personality. We explain why this phenomenon, in both the Soviet Union and China, is a consequence of the combat culture and discuss the differences in authority patterns between the two. The second half of the dissertation examines the impact of the succession following the cult of personality on the Leninist regime. Chapter IV looks at Khrushchev through the relationship of de-Stalinization to the changing pattern of authority in the Soviet Union. Chapter V is a detailed study of authority changes in China after Mao, related to the rise of Deng Xiaoping. The conclusion summarises these changes, to make clear the new relationship of the Party to the social structure.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Political science. $3 558774
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0615
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a University of California, Berkeley. $3 1183587
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 45-07A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=8512949 $z click for full text (PQDT)