George Kennan (Part II)

(3) Lenin, had he lived, might have proved a great man to reconcile . . . conflicting forces to the ultimate benefit of Russia society. Stalin, and those whom he led in the struggle for succession to Lenin's position of leadership were not the men to tolerate rival political forces . . . the sense of insecurity was too great. . . unmodified by any of the Anglo-Saxon traditions of compromise, was too fierce and too jealous to envisage any permanent sharing of power.

(4) They carried with them a skepticism as to the possibilities of permanent and peaceful co-existence of rival forces. Easily persuaded of their own doctrinaire "rightness," they insisted on the submission or destruction of all competing power.

(5) And within the Party the same principle was to apply. The mass of Party members might go through the motions of election, deliberation and action; but in these motions they were to be animated not by their own individual will but by the awesome breath of the Party leadership.

(6) That they alone knew what was good for society and that they would accomplish that good once their power was secure and unchallengeable. But in seeking that security of their own rule they were prepared to recognize no restrictions, either of God or man, on the character of their methods. (to be continued)

Reference:
1. [George Kennan]. "The Sources of Soviet Conduct" in Foreign Affairs, 1947.
2. US Department of State, Bureau of International Information Programs.(http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2005/March)
3. Una McGovern ed. Chambers Biographical Dictionary. Chambers Harrap Publishers Ltd.,2002.