Causes of Bolshevik Success Using Voilence Essays

Lenin was able to consolidate Bolshevik rule in Russia by combining popular policies and repression: To what extent do you agree with this statement.

As mentioned previously, Lenin won the civil war in 1918. This was crucial for the Bolsheviks to secure their power over Russia. However this did come with a price as well. Lenin essentially came to power through a coup d’état so it was only natural for there to be political opposition, ranging from monarchists to even foreign nations, collectively named the whites. However a

Poor Living and Working Conditions as the Reason for Bolsheviks' Seizure of Power in 1917

During the 1900’s the Russian Government made it extremely hard for the Bolsheviks to progress which made them revolt against the government making this a prime matter for the start of the Revolution. The Czarist government was ostracized by the common people of Russia so Tsar Nicholas II was overthrown by the Provisional Government, whom later on were overthrown by Lenin and shortly after the Bolsheviks took control over Russia. Russia was hard to develop because of the major leaders who had control; Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky. Almost overnight an entire society was destroyed and replaced with one of the most radical social experiments ever seen. Poverty, crime, privileged and class-divisions were to be eliminated, a new era of socialism

In October 1917, there was enough opposition for Lenin to take power as leader of the Bolsheviks. The Provisional Government provided him with no majority support, with the Bolsheviks winning 24% and the SRs gaining 54% of votes. The Liberal period consisting of keeping workers and peasants happy left them with little power. Decree on land gives noble land to peasantry so that they have legal title to it, did it to stop rebellion and get peasant support in the civil war. 2. War Communism- Summer 1918 (civil war)- more authoritarian. 3. 1921- New Economic freedom for peasantry Economic policy- less authoritarian.

The Success of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in October 1917 The Bolshevik seizure of power or coup de’tat of October 25th, 1917 was a culmination of both internal and external failure to satisfy the needs of an oppressed Russian society. In contrast to the spontaneous revolts earlier in 1917, the Bolshevik revolution was ‘a carefully planned plot carried out by ‘professional’ revolutionaries. ’[1] The victory of the Marxist Lenin’s

It was undoubtedly the Bolshevik leadership that made possible the revolution. It was the excellent combination of Trotsky’s rhetoric, rallying and inspiring personality, Lenin’s astute ability to judge the political mien and the whole party’s force and power within the country that led to superb tactics that would eventually make possible the October Revolution.

Without this course of action, the prospects of the Bolshevik's survival seemed slim. There was strong opposition to them both inside and outside the country. Lenin justified his action with the following speech: 'To hand over power to the Constituent Assembly would again be compromising with the malignant bourgeoisie. The Russian

This essay shall address the issue of how the far the brutality of Bolshevik Regime ensured the maintaining of it’s power between the years of 1917-24. This essay shall explore topics concerning the ‘Dictatorship Of The Proletariat’, The Cheka, War Communism, The Red Terror and other potential reasons for the Bolsheviks remaining in power. This essay shall also explore the various views put forth by various Historians such as Robert Conquest and Richard Pipes.

Upon the creation of the USSR, Lenin introduced new rule that would ensure greater totalitarian control. Only communists would be able to stand for the soviets, and so this meant that the communist party had the true control over the

Bolsheviks' Seizure of Power in 1917 There are many factors that help explain how and why the Bolsheviks managed to seize power in 1917. It was a combination of long and short term causes that together, created a revolution. The political system itself was long overdue for reform, but with a weak Tsar, the economic and social conditions became worse and worse. In 23 years, Nicholas II dropped from the glorious ‘Little Father of Russia’ to prisoners of his own country, hatred and despised by the majority, for the suffering and unhappiness he had helped create.

The Russian Revolution of 1917 set the country on a course that few other countries took in the 20th century. The shift from the direction of a democratic, parliamentary-style government to a one party communist rule was a drastic change that many did not and could not predict. Looking back on this key moment in Russian history, many historians ask the question ‘why did the political power in Russia shift to the Bolsheviks’? Since the revolution in 1905 Russia was becoming progressively more democratic, distributing power throughout the political sphere. This came to an abrupt halt when Vladimir Lenin was put into power by the Bolshevik takeover of the Provisional Government. Many authors have had different takes on this event. Two particularly interesting ones were Arthur Mendel and John D. Basil. Their pieces On Interpreting the Fate of Imperial Russia and Russia and the Bolshevik Revolution give various perspectives on the Russian Revolution and attempt to answer the question of the power shift. This key point in Russia’s history sets the tone for the next 100 years. Russia became a superpower, an enemy of the United States, started multiple wars directly and indirectly, and started using an economic system used by various countries around the world. Today we still see the effects of the 1917 Revolution. Looking at both Mendel’s and Basil’s attempt to answer why the power shifted to the Bolsheviks. Since both historian 's account of the events is different they cannot

Figes stating that “The masses were...largely passive in their demands and actions; the Bolsheviks successfully manipulated and exploited this...” . These views could largely be due to the ‘History from Above’ standpoint of Liberal historians that did much of the post-Union analysis at the tail end of the Cold War. This forms many of our traditional views of the nature of The Revolution.

Ten years in exile had not swayed Lenin?s determination to create and direct a powerful revolution. Lenin returned to Russia from exclusion in February 1917, believing that the time was ripe to seize power. The Russian economy was in ruin after the army was nearly defeated and the people exhausted as a result of the First World War. The country was in an unstable state, suitable for a revolution (Levinthal 119). Around October 20, Lenin, in disguise and at considerable personal risk, slipped into Petrograd and attended a secret meeting of the Bolshevik Central Committee held on the evening of October 23. Not until after a heated 10-hour debate did he finally win a majority in favour of preparing an armed takeover. Now steps to enlist the support of soldiers and sailors and to train the Red Guards, the Bolshevik-led workers' militia, for an armed takeover proceeded openly under the guise of self-defense of the Petrograd Soviet. Even at great personal risk, Lenin was adamant in spurring a successful revolution.

There were many different equally important reasons why Lenin and the Bolsheviks were able to hold on to their power. For Lenin, and the Bolsheviks, winning political power was relatively easy, compared with retaining it. They had many different objects to overcome, such as; Russia was in chaos, politically and economically, and normal government had broken down in large areas, yet despite all these problems Lenin was able to consolidate his power – and create the world’s first communist state.