DOCSLIB.ORG

Soviet Union

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Soviet Union Foundation: The Soviet Union was founded in 1922 after the Russian Civil War by Vladimir Lenin. The Soviet Union came to be when the Communists, headed by Vladimir Lenin, took power in the October Revolution which triggered a Civil War between the Monarchists, the forces who wanted to restore the Tsar, also called the White army along with numerous other factions. Government: The USSR, stands for Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The main government of the USSR was a one-party system, meaning that the only legal party in the parliament was the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union consisted of multiple republics like the: Russian, Ukrainian, Belarussian, Lithuanian, Estonian, Latvian, Moldovan, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Uzbek, Turkmen and Tajik Soviet Socialist Republics. Each individual republics had their own Communist Parties and all responded to orders from Moscow. Leadership, Policies and Blunder: Lenin: When the October Revolution happened, Vladimir Lenin took power in 1917. During Lenin’s rule however, the Russian Civil War lasted most of his rule until he died in 1924. Vladimir Lenin however, tried the process of collectivization which seized private lands and was redistributed to peasants who would work the land, grow the crops and then the government would collect the harvest and then distribute it. However, this only lead to a famine that killed 5 million people. Peasants who refused to comply were shot on sight and anyone caught stealing even a grain were killed by Soviet agents. However, after his death, a power struggle emerged between the General Secretary of the Communist Party, Joseph Stalin, and Lenin’s right hand man, Leon Trotsky. However, since Stalin had the most powerful position in the party which allowed him to purge Trotsky out of his party. So, in 1924, Stalin took power and banished Leon Trotsky. Stalin: Eventually, Stalin became General Secretary of the Communist Party. Which effectively making him the leader of the Soviet Union. Stalin hated the church. He thought that the church would diminish the influence of the communist party. So, he closed churches. Stalin is widely known for his brutality. His policy of collectivization was so brutal that it caused a Soviet famine that killed 6 million people in Ukraine. Then in 1934, a prominent communist official, named Sergey Kirov, was assassinated. This began the Great Terror were any perceived threat to Russia was executed or sent to prisons to worst parts of Siberia called the gulags. This included many military leaders and civilians. Then in 1939, Stalin and Hitler signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact which divided Eastern Europe between the USSR and Germany. Then in 1941, Germany invaded the USSR. Germany was successful until the Battle of Stalingrad which was the turning point of World War II. The USSR, the UK, and the US, after the war, created the UN. Also, after the war, Stalin, Churchill, and FDR divided Europe and Germany. Stalin established communist puppet states in East Germany, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Bulgaria. After WWII, the Cold War began. Stalin made a speech that said that communism and capitalism cannot coexist. In 1949, he tested the USSR's first nuclear weapon. Also, in 1949, he blocked the roads into East Berlin which began the Berlin Air Lift. In 1950, he supported North Korea's invasion of the South. And 4 months before the armistice between North and South Korea, he died. Stalin is widely remembered for being brutal. His famines and purges caused the deaths of 20 million people throughout the USSR. Nikita Khrushchev: Nikita Khrushchev came to power after a brief power struggle between the Head of the Secret Police, Beria and himself. After executing Beria because of crimes he committed, Khrushchev set about reversing most of Stalin’s policy like releasing people from the gulags and demoting and prosecuting Stalin hardliners. However, the core of the Soviet Union’s most oppressive policies and the work camps. Nikita Khrushchev oversaw the rise of Fidel Castro in Cuba and the Cuban Missile Crisis which nearly brought the world to a nuclear apocalypse. However, also during the Khrushchev premiership, a rift between China and the Soviet Union formed which caused a division in the communist world. However, Khrushchev was instrumental in softening the relations between the United States. Khrushchev remained in power until 1964 when Leonid Brezhnev replaced him as Premiere of the Soviet Union. Leonid Brezhnev: Brezhnev was a leader who was the complete opposite of Khrushchev because unlike Khrushchev, he was not as open to West. In fact under him, Wars in Africa and Asia were turned into proxy wars between the United States and the Soviet Union. Then in 1979, he made arguably the biggest mistake when he invaded Afghanistan. The Soviets installed a puppet government in Afghanistan however, Islamic insurgence bogged down the Russians. Then in 1982, Leonid Brezhnev died. After his death, Yuri Andropov came into power and then died in 1984 until finally, Mikhail Gorbachev finally came into power in 1985. Mikhail Gorbachev: Mikhail Gorbachev reformed the Soviet system using the terms, “Glasnost and Perestroika”. Glasnost meant “openness” and Perestroika was the reformation movement in that party. He allowed a free press which allowed a flood of criticism of the regime to become known. He expanded that right to the Eastern bloc. The Eastern bloc collapsed as Communist regimes were replaced with democracies. Meanwhile, back in the Soviet Union, instability grew as the different states that made up the Soviet Union, elected reformists. In the Russian SSR, a reformist by the name of Boris Yeltsin came into power and made a deal with the other Republics and long story-short, the Soviet Union collapsed. The Soviet Union was one of the most corrupt, brutal and bloodthirsty regimes in history with the worst human rights record. The Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 caused a ripple effect which caused regimes around the world to collapse into civil wars and insurgence because they did not receive any more funding from a Communist regime. .
Recommended publications
  • Maoism Versus Opportunism in Turkey

    Maoism Versus Opportunism in Turkey

    Maoism Versus Opportunism in Turkey The article below is excerpted from a letter written by the Committee of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (CoRIM) to the Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (TKP/ML) in mid-2001. The TKP/ML is one of several political centres that emerged from the formerly united Communist Party of Turkey Marxist-Leninist (TKPML), which was a founding participant of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement in 1984. During the course of a series of splits and realignments among Party forces, several centres of the TKPML have emerged, each of which continues to use the name of the Party and claim its heritage. The names of the two largest groupings that exist today are distinguished only by punctuation marks: the TKP(ML) and the TKP/ML. In the RIM Committee letter, reference is made to other centres that have existed in the course of the Party’s history, in particular the TKP/ML (Maoist Party Centre), which continues today, and the TKP/ML East Anatolia Regional Committee, usually referred to by its Turkish initials DABK, which merged with the TKP/ML Central Committee to form the TKP/ML Provisional United Central Committee in 1994 and which subsequently split into the above-mentioned TKP/ML, which publishes Ozgur Gelecek, and TKP(ML). To minimise confusion concerning the names of the different Party centres, no punctuation is used when referring to the previously united TKPML of 1984 and earlier, and the other centres are referred to by the punctuation they use themselves. As the letter makes clear, from the formation of RIM onwards serious differences emerged between the TKPML and RIM, and a long process of discussion and struggle has gone on involving the different centres that emerged from the previously united TKPML.
  • August 17, 1945 Draft Message from Joseph Stalin to Harry S. Truman

    August 17, 1945 Draft Message from Joseph Stalin to Harry S. Truman

    Digital Archive digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org International History Declassified August 17, 1945 Draft Message from Joseph Stalin to Harry S. Truman Citation: “Draft Message from Joseph Stalin to Harry S. Truman,” August 17, 1945, History and Public Policy Program Digital Archive, RGASPI Fond 558, Opis 11, Delo 372, List 111. Translated by Sergey Radchenko. http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/122330 Summary: Stalin requests that the Soviet Union gain possession of the Kurile Islands and the northern half of the island of Hokkaido, Japan. Original Language: Russian Contents: English Translation I received your message with “General Order No. 1.” In the main I do not object to the content of the order. With this, one has in mind that Liaodong Peninsula is a constituent part of Manchuria. However, I propose to introduce the following amendments to “General Order No. 1”: 1. Include all of the Kurile Islands, which, according to the decision of the third powers in the Crimea must pass into the possession of the Soviet Union, into the region of surrender by Japanese armed forces to Soviet forces. 2. Include the northern half of the island of Hokkaido, which adjoins in the North the Laperouse Strait, located between Karafuto and Hokkaido, into the region of surrender by Japanese armed forces to Soviet forces. The demarcation line between the northern and southern halves of the island of Hokkaido is to be drawn along the line, extending from the town of Kushiro on the eastern coast of the island until the town of Rumoe [sic] on the western coast of the island, including the said towns in the northern half of the island.
  • WHO's WHO in the WAR in EUROPE the War in Europe 7 CHARLES DE GAULLE

    WHO's WHO in the WAR in EUROPE the War in Europe 7 CHARLES DE GAULLE

    who’s Who in the War in Europe (National Archives and Records Administration, 342-FH-3A-20068.) POLITICAL LEADERS Allies FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT When World War II began, many Americans strongly opposed involvement in foreign conflicts. President Roosevelt maintained official USneutrality but supported measures like the Lend-Lease Act, which provided invaluable aid to countries battling Axis aggression. After Pearl Harbor and Germany’s declaration of war on the United States, Roosevelt rallied the country to fight the Axis powers as part of the Grand Alliance with Great Britain and the Soviet Union. (Image: Library of Congress, LC-USZ62-128765.) WINSTON CHURCHILL In the 1930s, Churchill fiercely opposed Westernappeasement of Nazi Germany. He became prime minister in May 1940 following a German blitzkrieg (lightning war) against Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, and France. He then played a pivotal role in building a global alliance to stop the German juggernaut. One of the greatest orators of the century, Churchill raised the spirits of his countrymen through the war’s darkest days as Germany threatened to invade Great Britain and unleashed a devastating nighttime bombing program on London and other major cities. (Image: Library of Congress, LC-USW33-019093-C.) JOSEPH STALIN Stalin rose through the ranks of the Communist Party to emerge as the absolute ruler of the Soviet Union. In the 1930s, he conducted a reign of terror against his political opponents, including much of the country’s top military leadership. His purge of Red Army generals suspected of being disloyal to him left his country desperately unprepared when Germany invaded in June 1941.
  • Stalin Revolutionary in an Era of War 1St Edition Pdf, Epub, Ebook

    Stalin Revolutionary in an Era of War 1St Edition Pdf, Epub, Ebook

    STALIN REVOLUTIONARY IN AN ERA OF WAR 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Kevin McDermott | 9780333711224 | | | | | Stalin Revolutionary in an Era of War 1st edition PDF Book It was under this name that he went to Switzerland in the winter of , where he met with Lenin and collaborated on a theoretical work, Marxism and the National and Colonial Question. They argue that in the article On the Slogan for a United States of Europe the expression "triumph of socialism [ Seller Rating:. Vladimir Lenin died in January and by the end of that year in the second edition of the book Stalin's position started to turn around as he claimed that "the proletariat can and must build the socialist society in one country". Modern History Review. Refresh and try again. Tucker's subject, however, which isn't Mont I have admired Robert Tucker's work for decades now, and I am glad at long last to take up the first of his two volume study of Stalin. Brazil United Kingdom United States. Retrieved August 27, Egan The major difficulty is a lack of agreement about what should constitute Stalinism. Stalin and Lenin were close friends, judging from this photograph. He wrote that the concept of Stalinism was developed after by Western intellectuals so as to be able to keep alive the communist ideal. Retrieved September 20, Palgrave Macmillan UK. Antonio rated it it was amazing Jun 04, Retrieved 7 October During the quarter of a century preceding his death, the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin probably exercised greater political power than any other figure in history.
  • PERESTROIKA PROPAGANDA in the SOVIET FOREIGN PRESS by Matthew Brown

    PERESTROIKA PROPAGANDA in the SOVIET FOREIGN PRESS by Matthew Brown

    CONTRIBUTOR BIO MATTHEW BROWN graduated from Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo in June of 2013 with a Bachelor of Arts in History and a minor in Geography & Anthropology. His academic in- terests include the Cold War, the Soviet Union, and revolutionary political theory. Matthew is currently working as a substitute teacher while pursuing a Social Science teaching credential at CSU Long Beach, and is exploring his op- tions for teaching English abroad next school year. He plans on pursuing a Master’s degree in Russian and/or Eastern European history, and would like to eventually teach at the uni- versity level. ECHOES OF A DYING STATE: PERESTROIKA PROPAGANDA IN THE SOVIET FOREIGN PRESS By Matthew Brown “Perestroika means mass initiative. It is the comprehensive devel- opment of democracy, socialist self-government, encouragement of initiative and creative endeavor, improved order and discipline, more glasnost, criticism and self-criticism in all spheres of our society. It is utmost respect for the individual and consideration for personal dignity.”230 The collapse of the Soviet Union marked the end of one of the most tumultuous and volatile periods in modern history. The Soviet Union was not destroyed by a foreign military invasion, nor was it torn apart by civil war. The events that resulted in one of the most powerful countries the world has ever seen literally signing itself out of existence were official government policy, heavily promoted by the Communist Party as the pinnacle of Soviet ideology, and praised by the Soviet intelligentsia as a clear path to a prosperous society. The perestroika and glasnost reforms, instituted under Mikhail Gorbachev, represent the final 230 Mikhail Gorbachev, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World (New York: Harper & Row, 1987), 34.
  • GCSE History: the Cold W Ar Topic 3: Détente and End Of

    GCSE History: the Cold W Ar Topic 3: Détente and End Of

    Summary Key Vocabulary Although the invasion of Czechoslovakia had strained USA-USSR ‘Relaxing of tensions’. Particularly from 1970-79, both the USA Détente relations, the 1970s was a decade of clear détente; both sides made and USSR were willing to work with each other. several important agreements such as USA pulling out of the Afghan In 1978, Soviet-backed Afghan communists took over the country, Vietnam War in 1973, and the Helsinki Agreement 1975 which Revolution but struggled to get enough support amongst Afghans. guaranteed human rights and the borders of all countries in Europe. The Islamic extremists who were fighting in the Afghan Civil War Mujahideen Détente ended in 1979 when Brezhnev made the decision to against communism. They were given funds/supplies by the USA. invade Afghanistan to support the communist government against A form of warfare where small group of rebels use ambushes and guerrilla Islamic extremists. The US public reacted by voting for Ronald hit-and-run tactics to fight a larger army. The Mujahideen used warfare Reagan who followed a hardline stance against the USSR, calling it this against the USSR, and the Vietcong used it against the USA. an ’evil empire’ and increasing US military spending. The refusal to pay for/attend something. The USA boycotted the boycott By the mid-1980s, the USSR had massive debts from the Afghan Moscow Olympics; the USSR boycotted Los Angeles 4 years later. GCSE History: The Cold War Cold The History: GCSE War. The final leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, promised massive ratify A treaty/agreement does not become law until it is ratified.
  • The Kgb's Image-Building Under

    The Kgb's Image-Building Under

    SPREADING THE WORD: THE KGB’S IMAGE-BUILDING UNDER GORBACHEV by Jeff Trimble The Joan Shorenstein Center PRESS ■ POLI TICS Discussion Paper D-24 February 1997 ■ PUBLIC POLICY ■ Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government INTRODUCTION The KGB, under many different sets of graduate student at the Pushkin Russian Lan- initials, evokes frightening memories of the guage Institute in Moscow during the 1979-80 Soviet period of Russian history. A garrison academic year, later as Moscow correspondent state within a state, it provided the terror that for U.S. News & World Report from 1986 to glued the Soviet Union into a unitary force for 1991, Trimble observed the changes not just in evil. Few bucked the system, and dissent was the old KGB but in the old Soviet Union and, in limited, for the most part, to whispers over this paper, based on his own research, he ex- dinner or under the sheets. Millions were herded plains their significance. At a time in American into the communist version of concentration life when we seem to be largely indifferent to the camps, or transported to Siberia, or simply rest of the world, we are indebted to Trimble for executed for crimes no more serious than having his reminder that the past is not too far removed the wrong economic or ideological pedigree. from the present. The KGB, by its brutal behavior, came to be The question lurking between the lines is identified throughout the world with the Soviet whether the changes in image are in fact system of government. When the system, with changes in substance as well.
  • Interview with Joseph Stalin (6 October 1951)

    Interview with Joseph Stalin (6 October 1951)

    Interview with Joseph Stalin (6 October 1951) Caption: On 6 October 1951, Joseph Stalin gives an interview to Pravda in which he responds to US criticism of the Soviet Union’s nuclear policy. Source: Soviet news. 2595, n° 08.10.1951. London: Press Department of the Soviet Embassy in London. "J.V. Stalin's reply to a Pravda Correspondant on the Atomic Weapon", p. 1. Copyright: All rights of reproduction, public communication, adaptation, distribution or dissemination via Internet, internal network or any other means are strictly reserved in all countries. The documents available on this Web site are the exclusive property of their authors or right holders. Requests for authorisation are to be addressed to the authors or right holders concerned. Further information may be obtained by referring to the legal notice and the terms and conditions of use regarding this site. URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/interview_with_joseph_stalin_6_october_1951-en-d0743acd-c816-43b7-a415- 5674372cb4f5.html Last updated: 03/07/2015 1 / 3 03/07/2015 Interview with Stalin (6 October 1951) J. V. Stalin’s reply to a “Pravda” Correspondent on the atomic weapon QUESTION: What is your opinion of the hullabaloo raised recently in the foreign press in connection with the testing of an atom bomb in the Soviet Union? ANSWER: Indeed, one of the types of atom bombs was recently tested in our country. Tests of atom bombs of different calibres will be conducted in the future as well in accordance with the plan for the defence of our country from attack by the Anglo-American aggressive bloc.
  • Perestroika and the Politics of the Revolutionary Left in Latin America

    Perestroika and the Politics of the Revolutionary Left in Latin America

    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-1991 Perestroika and the politics of the revolutionary left in Latin America. Stephen R. Pelletier University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Pelletier, Stephen R., "Perestroika and the politics of the revolutionary left in Latin America." (1991). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 1811. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/1811 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ummoo/ MwlntHbl ,, '»'‘‘*«'? ?-:ranSiI.Jh*„,*' 312Dbb D2T6 ] UNIVERSITY LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS LIBRARY AT AMHERST ARCHIVES LD 3234 M267 1991 P3885 BDDDDDDDaaDDaaDDDDDDDDODDDDD PERESTROIKA AND THE POLITICS OF THE REVOLUTIONARY LEFT IN LATIN AMERICA A Dissertation Presented by STEPHEN R. PELLETIER Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY September 1991 Department of Political Science Copyright by Stephen Raymond Pelletier 1991 All Rights Reserved PERESTROIKA AND THE POLITICS OF THE REVOLUTIONARY LEFT IN LATIN AMERICA A Dissertation Presented by STEPHEN R. PELLETIER Approved as to style and content by: Howard J. Wiarda, Chair , ABSTRACT PERESTROIKA AND THE POLITICS OF THE REVOLUTIONARY LEFT IN LATIN AMERICA SEPTEMBER 1991 STEPHEN R. PELLETIER, B.A., MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY Ph . D . , UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS Directed by: Professor Howard Wiarda The purpose of this dissertation is to examine the impact of Soviet perestroika and foreign policy "new thinking" on the Revolutionary Left in Cuba, Nicaragua and El Salvador.
  • “Buried in the Sands of the Ogaden”: the United States, the Horn of Africa and the Demise of Detente

    “Buried in the Sands of the Ogaden”: the United States, the Horn of Africa and the Demise of Detente

    “Buried in the Sands of the Ogaden”: The United States, The Horn of Africa and The Demise of Detente. Louise Prentis Woodroofe London School of Economics and Political Science PhD International History UMI Number: U615656 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615656 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Abstract The decade of the 1970s, despite representing the era of detente, superficially appeared to be one of Soviet successes and American setbacks. From Vietnam to Angola, the USSR seemed to be gaining Marxist friends in the Third World. Because of this, the Soviet Union wanted the United States to recognize it as an equal power in the world. With such acknowledgement, the Kremlin believed that negotiations to limit the arms race would then be mutually beneficial. On the other hand, President Nixon and Secretary of State Kissinger interpreted detente as a series of agreements and compromises to draw Moscow into an international system through which the United States could exercise some control over Soviet foreign relations, particularly with the Third World.
  • Glasnost, Perestroika and the Soviet Media Communication and Society General Editor: James Curran

    Glasnost, Perestroika and the Soviet Media Communication and Society General Editor: James Curran

    Glasnost, Perestroika and the Soviet Media Communication and Society General editor: James Curran Social Work, the Media and Public Relations Bob Franklin and Dave Murphy What News? The Market, Politics and the Local Press Bob Franklin and Dave Murphy Images of the Enemy: Reporting the New Cold War Brian McNair Pluralism, Politics and the Marketplace: The Regulation of German Broadcasting Vincent Porter and Suzanne Hasselbach Potboilers: Methods, Concepts and Case Studies in Popular Fiction Jerry Palmer Glasnost, Perestroika and the Soviet Media Brian McNair London and New York First published 1991 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2006. “ To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to http://www.ebookstore.tandf.co.uk/.” Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge a division of Routledge, Chapman and Hall, Inc. 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 © 1991 Brian McNair All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data McNair, Brian Glasnost, perestroika and the Soviet media. – (Communication and scoiety). 1. Soviet Union. Mass media I. Title II. Series 302.230947 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data McNair, Brian Glasnost, perestroika and the Soviet media / Brian McNair.
  • What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II

    What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II

    A Thesis entitled “Uncle Joe”: What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II by Kimberly Hupp A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of The Masters of Liberal Studies ______________________________ Advisor: Dr. Michael Jakobson ______________________________ College of Graduate Studies University of Toledo May 2009 1 2 An Abstract of “Uncle Joe”: What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II by Kimberly Hupp A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of The Master of Liberal Studies University of Toledo May 2009 A thesis presented on the American public opinion of Josef Stalin before and after World War II beginning with how Russia and Stalin was portrayed in the media before the war began, covering how opinions shifted with major events such as the famine, collectivization, the Great Terror, wartime conferences, the Cold War and McCarthyism. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................ii Table of Contents................................................................................................iii Acknowledgements .............................................................................................v List of Figures……………………………………………………………….vii List of Abbreviations……………………………………………………… .viii Introduction.........................................................................................................