If you want to chase down the BBC documentary series around the war of the century it's worth looking at. But that's not the, the main point I raised now. At the time it was believed that 20 million people died in direct combat, through disease. and through if you like, peripheral damage from the war on the Eastern front. As the estimates of those who died under Stalin in the 1930s have been revised downwards. Those numbers who died in the great patriotic war have increased upwards. Currently estimates are pushing 26.7 million people who died 1941 to 1945 defending or regaining the Soviet Union territory. So, one way or the other whether it be fighting for Mother Russia, the greatest Soviet experiment all for Stalin himself. There was a commitment amongst the population as a whole to ensure that the territorial integrity of the Soviet Union could be maintained. And of course we have what is effectively the development of another empire. The annexation of Eastern Europe after 1945 with the beginnings of the Cold War. Now, the reason I, I raise this in the context of Stalin's leadership. Was that it was very important for him to, to have the Soviet Union as one of the three in the Great Alliance. Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, and by the end of the war there ended up being Truman, Atley, and Stalin. Each having a position on a world stage that was important. Yet, we know the degree to which European jewelry was eliminated by the excesses of Nazi Germany, 6 million Jews, homosexuals. Those with physical or mental disorders, those who were from what we might describe as a traveler communities now are, are eliminated. Because they didn't fit in with, a, then German views of, a, racial purity. Yet after the second world war that knowledge was largely suppressed from population of the soviet union. And we actually see, purge against those in prominent positions in Soviet society who were Jewish. Now, that didn't involve their death and elimination. But nevertheless, there's a degree of insensitivity, if you'd like, as racism became unfashionable in western Europe. We quietly see so, Soviet society purged of yet another group that appeared to be disagreeing with Stalin. Likewise, we start finding the military leaders, some of the, those who are led the Soviet Union in the great, Patriotic War. being removed from position, and being taken out of a position of influence based on Starlin's concern about maintaining control. So, when we are actually looking at both the Soviet Union during the period of, of Starlin's life and Starlin's degree of leadership. It did revolve very much around having those that he trusted in his immediate vicinity. And the denunciation of those who failed to meet his high standards, or at least were, he was prepared to make carry the can if things didn't go wrong. So the Molotov, what was appeared to be, a foreign policy failure in Germany, the Berlin airlift. the development of NATO, a whole range of factors that seemed to work against the Soviet Union, we find that Molotov is again relegated. in this case not disappeared but his position within the Soviet leadership declines. So if we're looking at the Soviet Union and Stalin's leadership, we're talking about a degree of autocratic dictatorship. Those are buzz words, they're cliche term. The key thing I'd, I'd like you to think about is, given all of this disruption within Soviet society. Given these changes, how much Stalin prized his image in the public mind. How much it was important to him to be projected as the great leader. And it's something that, as an undergraduate, I was, I was taught. And I mentioned Dr Waterlow's seminar a couple of weeks ago that reinforced it. If only Stalin knew, that's something that echoed through a proportion of the population. That if the great, leader knew what was being, what was happening, he would put a stop to it. So there may be something in Soviet society and culture that migrates towards a strong and well-directed leadership. I'm not necessarily saying that Stalin was well-direct, well-directed. But he was certainly effective in achieving his goals. even though they wouldn't be considered to be efficient in Western terms. And, let's think about Russia and Georgia and the former Soviet Union states in the 21st Century. There has been some concern that there is a quote rehabilitation of Stalin. in the eyes of people who have no direct experience of what Stalin is in, was like. Stalin died in 1953 and he's taking position that might be acquainted with those of Catherine the Great and other Soviet leaders in, of the past. If you like the excesses and the the horrors that were associated with his leadership are being moved to the background. Well there's some consideration that we have another strong leader in Soviet history. And at least some parallels be made to some of the contemporary leaders as well. Not as being Stalinist but in terms of strong leadership is good for Russia as a whole. So, when we actually consider the way that the Soviet Union projected and how Stalin was projected during this period. This is, issue of image and Russian culture I think is a very important one to consider and that's what we're going to deal with in the next section.