What do you think?
Rate this book
Khrushchev: A Political Life
Tracing the life and career of Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev, a detailed portrait emphasizes his role in the development of the Soviet Union after Stalin while discussing his political strategies, position as leader, and removal from office.
- GenresPolitics
341 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 1994
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 18, 2026
This biographical book focuses on the life of Khrushchev, the Premier of the Soviet Union following Stalin.
The first chapter describes how Khrushchev received very little education and earned his living mainly by working in the mines, whilst the second chapter recounts how he joined the Central Committee in 1935 thanks to his relationship with Kaganovich. Alliluyeva, Stalin’s wife, whom he met by a remarkable stroke of chance, also played a key role in Khrushchev’s rise within the Party’s Moscow organisation. In the years that followed, Khrushchev, who praised Stalin in almost every speech and opposed his enemies with a ‘more royalist than the king’ attitude, transformed the very structural fabric of Moscow at a high human and economic cost, driven by his passion for ‘renewal’.
In the third chapter, the book examines Khrushchev’s role as the head of the Ukrainian front during the Second World War, his contribution to the ‘Great Purge’ carried out in the region, the Russification of Ukraine, and his efforts to make the kolkhoz (collective farms) more disciplined. Thompson argues that Khrushchev’s peasant background was the reason he managed to escape Stalin’s wrath.
In the fourth chapter, Khrushchev’s focus on agriculture, his suppression of the post-World War II independence movement in Ukraine (and even his attempts to eradicate Ukrainian national identity), followed by the iconic box-shaped car he had built ‘on the cheap’ in Moscow, and his rise to the position of Premier in the 1950s alongside Malenkov and Beria following Stalin’s death.
Chapter Five examines the breakdown of the Beria–Malenkov alliance following Stalin’s death, the subsequent elimination of Beria, and the organisational changes (the subordination of the NKVD and the KGB to the Central Committee). Subsequently, Khrushchev came to power through both political maneuvering within the party and by sidelining Malenkov on agricultural issues.
However, contrary to his previous statements, Khrushchev, having initiated a policy of rapprochement with the West and Yugoslavia, rejected Eisenhower’s ‘Open Skies’ proposal when no concrete positive response to this overture came from the West. He replaced Stalin’s dogma of ‘whoever is not with us is against us’ with his own: ‘whoever is not against us is with us’.
At the party congress in 1956, Khrushchev, who heavily criticised Stalin, also distanced himself from Leninist doctrine and advocated for a ‘peaceful coexistence’ with the West. Most importantly, he ushered in a period of visible détente. However, the stance taken by Poland and, subsequently, Hungary towards Moscow (Hungarian leader Nagy demanded withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact…) led Khrushchev to put this ‘de-Stalinisation’ policy on hold.
The policies adopted by Britain and France during the Suez Crisis, however, further strained Soviet-Western relations.
“It doesn’t depend on you whether or not we exist. If you don’t like us, don’t invite us… whether you like it or not… we will bury you!”
Khrushchev planned to increase the Soviet Union’s power by decentralising the administration and economy to some extent, whilst also attempting, with the support of Marshal Zhukov and the committee, to eliminate the supporters of his enemies. However, although Khrushchev, fearing his power, forced him to resign and improved his position through the ‘Virgin Lands Programme’, his failure to support the Central Committee proved costly for Khrushchev.
“He intended to destroy the ministries and increase regionalisation of management with only limited decentralisation.”
“Soviet economic development had reached the stage where each additional step forward required more investment than the one before it.” (talk about marginal diminishing returns!)
Khrushchev’s foreign policy was aimed at reconciliation with the West, maintaining communism under Soviet leadership, and winning allies among Third World countries. However, the U-2 incident, the Sino-Soviet split, and his being forced to back down during the Cuban Missile Crisis led to Khrushchev’s resignation in 1964.
“A politician is a given a tongue in order to hide his true thought.”
An interesting point: According to some, Khrushchev’s policy of ‘decentralisation’ was also to blame for the corruption that began to take hold among local officials in the Soviet Union in the 1980s.
Although I generally don’t care much for biographical works, I really enjoyed this one.
The first chapter describes how Khrushchev received very little education and earned his living mainly by working in the mines, whilst the second chapter recounts how he joined the Central Committee in 1935 thanks to his relationship with Kaganovich. Alliluyeva, Stalin’s wife, whom he met by a remarkable stroke of chance, also played a key role in Khrushchev’s rise within the Party’s Moscow organisation. In the years that followed, Khrushchev, who praised Stalin in almost every speech and opposed his enemies with a ‘more royalist than the king’ attitude, transformed the very structural fabric of Moscow at a high human and economic cost, driven by his passion for ‘renewal’.
In the third chapter, the book examines Khrushchev’s role as the head of the Ukrainian front during the Second World War, his contribution to the ‘Great Purge’ carried out in the region, the Russification of Ukraine, and his efforts to make the kolkhoz (collective farms) more disciplined. Thompson argues that Khrushchev’s peasant background was the reason he managed to escape Stalin’s wrath.
In the fourth chapter, Khrushchev’s focus on agriculture, his suppression of the post-World War II independence movement in Ukraine (and even his attempts to eradicate Ukrainian national identity), followed by the iconic box-shaped car he had built ‘on the cheap’ in Moscow, and his rise to the position of Premier in the 1950s alongside Malenkov and Beria following Stalin’s death.
Chapter Five examines the breakdown of the Beria–Malenkov alliance following Stalin’s death, the subsequent elimination of Beria, and the organisational changes (the subordination of the NKVD and the KGB to the Central Committee). Subsequently, Khrushchev came to power through both political maneuvering within the party and by sidelining Malenkov on agricultural issues.
However, contrary to his previous statements, Khrushchev, having initiated a policy of rapprochement with the West and Yugoslavia, rejected Eisenhower’s ‘Open Skies’ proposal when no concrete positive response to this overture came from the West. He replaced Stalin’s dogma of ‘whoever is not with us is against us’ with his own: ‘whoever is not against us is with us’.
At the party congress in 1956, Khrushchev, who heavily criticised Stalin, also distanced himself from Leninist doctrine and advocated for a ‘peaceful coexistence’ with the West. Most importantly, he ushered in a period of visible détente. However, the stance taken by Poland and, subsequently, Hungary towards Moscow (Hungarian leader Nagy demanded withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact…) led Khrushchev to put this ‘de-Stalinisation’ policy on hold.
The policies adopted by Britain and France during the Suez Crisis, however, further strained Soviet-Western relations.
“It doesn’t depend on you whether or not we exist. If you don’t like us, don’t invite us… whether you like it or not… we will bury you!”
Khrushchev planned to increase the Soviet Union’s power by decentralising the administration and economy to some extent, whilst also attempting, with the support of Marshal Zhukov and the committee, to eliminate the supporters of his enemies. However, although Khrushchev, fearing his power, forced him to resign and improved his position through the ‘Virgin Lands Programme’, his failure to support the Central Committee proved costly for Khrushchev.
“He intended to destroy the ministries and increase regionalisation of management with only limited decentralisation.”
“Soviet economic development had reached the stage where each additional step forward required more investment than the one before it.” (talk about marginal diminishing returns!)
Khrushchev’s foreign policy was aimed at reconciliation with the West, maintaining communism under Soviet leadership, and winning allies among Third World countries. However, the U-2 incident, the Sino-Soviet split, and his being forced to back down during the Cuban Missile Crisis led to Khrushchev’s resignation in 1964.
“A politician is a given a tongue in order to hide his true thought.”
An interesting point: According to some, Khrushchev’s policy of ‘decentralisation’ was also to blame for the corruption that began to take hold among local officials in the Soviet Union in the 1980s.
Although I generally don’t care much for biographical works, I really enjoyed this one.
December 9, 2012
I don't know what brought me to read this book. Khrushchev isn't exactly the guy I would look for a book about first. However, I found this one a while back and gave it a go.
Khrushchev is fascinating. This book gives a lot of detail about him, his origins and accomplishments. He is kind of an enigma to many in the west, perhaps more so than Stalin or Brezhnev. So much is storied about Stalin. Brezhnev was more available in media or at least to an audience listening to it about foreign issues. However, Khrushchev as no small player in higher echelons of Russian politics. Perhaps he was the most dramatic and outspoken of old-school Russian leaders.
I enjoyed the book. It will give you insight into events like the Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK and Castro; all of which are salient to Americans as many of us were dynamically affected by these.
Khrushchev is fascinating. This book gives a lot of detail about him, his origins and accomplishments. He is kind of an enigma to many in the west, perhaps more so than Stalin or Brezhnev. So much is storied about Stalin. Brezhnev was more available in media or at least to an audience listening to it about foreign issues. However, Khrushchev as no small player in higher echelons of Russian politics. Perhaps he was the most dramatic and outspoken of old-school Russian leaders.
I enjoyed the book. It will give you insight into events like the Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK and Castro; all of which are salient to Americans as many of us were dynamically affected by these.
January 29, 2014
Long and dry, but a good review of the politics within the ruling class.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews