With reference to two examples, drawn from different regions, discuss the claim that the ruler's identity was more important to single-party states than their policies.

The personality cults of Mao Zedong and Adolf Hitler were highly important to controlling their respective states, as they established a level of informal, "soft" power throughout both their parties and the general populace. However, it was the policies of both these rulers that established, and maintained, control over their states more than their identities - the latter factor was more the expression of control than the cause of it. Control over a single-party state necessarily requires a power-relationship with both the populace and the party, one that is expressed in both policies and a cult of personality. I believe that while Mao depended more on his relationship with the populace, Hitler instead focused on intra-party relationships. In both however, it was the social, political and economic policies that had a greater impact on their respective rules than the cults of personality that arose during their leadership. Though a general comparison of the two rulers shall be made, this will be achieved through focusing on a few key points, namely Mao's Great Leap Forward and Hitler's intra-party policy of divide and rule.