Ideological differences between Liberalism in England and Leninism in the Soviet Union place the two nations at opposite ends of the political spectrum. The former advocates for the importance of individualism and the ability of the market to regulate itself, whereas the latter prioritizes the state above its citizens, and relies on the omnipotence of the party to command the economy. In this paper, we will first examine a prominent similarity between England and the Soviet Union – the sufferings of the people in the lower classes. Then we will shift the focus to the differences in the two countries, and the ideologies behind their distinguishing paths of development. Specifically, we will analyze their respective forms of governmental control, economic structure, and the results of the regimes' tactics. These points may seem unrelated, however the uniting theme behind these dissimilarities is the basic ideological difference underlying the two nations' political and economic systems. This ideological difference dictates whose in power, how the economy matures, and consequently where the country ends up years later. In England, liberalism puts the large middle class in control. This group of liberal entrepreneurs utilize their economic power to gain political influence. In contrast, Leninism concentrates the political distribution of power in the Soviet Union around the communist party, and at times one man – Stalin. Before we delve into the distinctions though, let's first look at one outstanding similarity: the extensive oppression that both regimes' subjects experience.
             Long after the communist party came to power in the Soviet Union, the nation remained relatively backward in terms of industrialization. 85 percent of the Russian population was comprised of peasants dispersed in the country side. In retrospect there were no proletariats that nurtured the rise of communism in Russia,...