The problem with great leaders and Shapers is that they are also mortals, and, as such, subject to mortality. Alexander's empire did not long outlive its creator, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s message of peace was lost in the violence following his assassination, and, almost as soon as Washington died, Hamilton and Jefferson were forming the political parties that, though un- imagined by the framers of the Constitution, have affected the course of American history more than almost any other factor. When Lenin died in 1924, he left the country he had built leaderless and without the one man who had both the humility to admit his mistakes and the power to correct them. In the US, following the death of Washington, the Federalists and the Jeffersonians each abided by the Constitution and relinquished power when required to do so. But in the Soviet Union Stalin was able to eliminate all his rivals, leaving himself in complete control of the state.
Anarchists believe that the state is the ultimate evil, keeping humanity from true freedom.
Marx held that the bourgeois state would be washed away, replaced by a dictatorship of the proletariat. Lenin created a socialistic society ruled by a central party. Stalin took the idea of a monolithic communist party controlling all aspects of life one step further, creating out of the oligarchy of the Politburo a dictatorship in which the state as well as the party was truly himself. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from the post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more considerate to the comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may appear to be an insignificant trifle.