Essay #2
After the Russian Revolution, there was a lot of confusion on how to establish institutions strong enough to rebuild and hold the state and society together. An issue with Marxism is that it is is not a theory of governance, rather a theory of how to bring a socialist regime into power—hence explaining the lack of guidance. At this time, Lenin took control. But after his death, the Russians were once again faced with appointing a leader to direct them. The domestic and international conditions in which the Soviet Union found itself, the legacy of Leninist ideology and organization, and Stalin’s overall character were all factors that helped determine the policies Stalin adopted.
When the Bolsheviks overthrew the Tsarists, there
…show more content…
Stalin 's rise to power was a combination of his ability to manipulate situations and the failure of others to prevent him from taking power. Leon Trotsky, who was considered a contender for the position, lost because of his lack of “physical vitality at the crucial time… and failed to recognize the rules of the succession struggle or of mass politics generally” (Von Laue 103). Stalin’s ethics and firsthand experience in the popular political culture—a leader rising from the masses— enabled him to take over Lenin’s position. Stalin’s approach to governing was shaped by his troubled childhood, “nationalistic struggle within the multinational Russian empire, by the revolutionary underground and the tsarist police, by World War I, by the Bolshevik seizure of power, the civil war, and the succession struggle” (Von Laue 104.) Additionally, the Western world also had an impact on how Stalin directed and imposed his power.
Between 1900-1902, Lenin led the effort to introduce communism into Russia. He “adapted Marxism to Russian use and devised a persuasive prescription for Russian superiority… Its stress on universal working-class solidarity allowed an escape from the divisive nationalism threatening the multinational Russian empire.” (Von Laue 61), but his approach still focused on the need for an apocalyptic class struggle to overthrow the oppressing regime, leading into a millenarian socialist society. He
Joseph Stalin used his intellect, and power, to outmanoeuvre his rivals to become leader of the Soviet Union. Using carefully planned propaganda including, painting, statues, and a series of cultivated posters Stalin immortalised and glorified his leadership. These state-manufactured images created a ‘cult of personality' around him, subsequently, creating an image of a heroic worshipped figure, who was associated with every aspect of soviet society. Stalin controlled the media and according to the historian Moshe Lewin, Stalin single handily, ‘become the system,’ (Lewin in Pittaway, 2008, p.137.)
Soso Djugashvili, more commonly known as Joseph Stalin, ‘man of steel’, dictator of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) Russia, can be considered a ‘Red Tsar’ to an extent when features of Stalinism are compared to those of Tsarism and Russia ruled by Nicholas II’s autocratic regime from 1894 to 1917. A ‘Red Tsar’ is a communist leader whom follows similar principles followed under the leadership of a Tsar, that were influenced by few opinions allowing sole leadership and little opposition from others. Stalin can be considered a ‘Red Tsar’ to an extent as he ruled Communist Russia as a somewhat totalitarian state and was considered a ‘God-like’ figure sent to Earth to lead the nation and its people. From Stalin’s reign of terror from 1929 to 1953 there can be similarities seen in his regime to features of Tsarism as well as differences, this is why there are alternative interpretations for Stalin being considered a ‘Red Tsar’.
Once eliminating Trotsky, Stalin’s idea of, “socialism in our country,” inevitably meant that Russia needed strength. The productions in the USSR had almost reached pre-war levels by the mid-1920s, but the population of Russia had also increased by 20 million people. No matter, Stalin assured that maximum efforts and resources would be given to the expansion and strengthening of Russia herself rather than an effort to start a revolution elsewhere. This is explained in his famous 1931 speech, gaining power for himself. The people had nowhere else to turn to and needed a leader. Stalin was there and knew what to do to make the people interested in his ideas, thus acquired their trust and control. From these ideas, he created his first
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
Joseph Stalin, from the time that he was a low level revolutionary to the years that he spent as the dictator of the Soviet Union, always knew what he needed to do to achieve his goals. His organized rise to power allowed him to gain a steady flow of followers who would support him for decades to come. Stalin received a minor government position in 1917, but by the time a new leader was needed in 1924, he “had turned the largely routine post of Party general secretary into the most powerful office in the Soviet Union” (“Joseph Stalin) and “had built a personal empire for himself through his control over committee appointments at all levels . . . expand[ing] the leading Party organs with his supporters, who then voted against his rivals”
Joseph Stalin greatly influenced Russia in the years 1924 through 1932. His rise to this power can be explained by the Russian Revolutionary experience that allowed him to gain authority in Russia. Although historians often refer to Stalin as a ruthless, mindless dictator, he redirected the Russian Revolution to major economic development. Stalin’s character in Russia during the Revolution catalyzed the many events that took place during the time period. Because of Stalin’s ability to both appeal to the masses, and take advantage of events, like Lenin’s death, Stalin was able to rise to power. Essentially, the Russian Revolution fostered the development of Stalin’s dictatorship leading the country into a state of economic growth and influence. The Revolution fostered Stalin’s ability to maintain a central leadership, use violence to gain control, and regenerate a previously disconnected economy.
After Lenin’s death, Stalin removed his colleagues from power and many were exiled including Leon Trotsky,
Over the period from 1855 to 1964, Russia saw various reforms and policies under the Tsars and the Communist leaders that had great impacts on its economy and society both positive and negative. Lenin definitely implanted polices that changed society and the economy for example with war communism. However whether his policies had the greatest impact is debatable and in this essay I will be assessing the view whether Lenin had the greatest impact on Russia’s economy and society than any other ruler between the period from 1855-1964.
The Russian revolution was a monumental change for Russia they went from a government of ordocrasy to communism, with evidence it will show that this truly was a change Russia needed. Yet many argue that the death and outcome was not what the people had imagined when agreeing to communism.
The Russian Revolution was a series of two revolutions that consisted of the February Revolution and the October Revolution. The February Revolution of March 8th, 1917 was a revolution targeted and successfully removed Czar Nicholas II from power. The February Revolution first began to take place when strikes and public protests between 1916 and early 1917 started occurring. These strikes were created to protest against and to blame Czar Nicholas II for Russia’s poor performance in WWI and severe food shortages that the country facing. Soon, violence between protesters and authorities began to escalate, and on February 24th, 1917 in the city of Petrograd, hundreds of thousands of male and female workers flooded the streets. They all had the same purpose which was to protest against the “Great War” and the monarchy. The protests began to escalate and the vastly outnumbered police were unable to control the crowds. When news of the unrest reached the czar, he ordered the military to put an end to the riots by the next day, and on February 26th, 1917, several troops of a local guard regiment fired upon the crowds, but however many soldiers felt pity and empathy for the protesters than the czar, and on the next day, more than 80,000 soldiers join the protest even directly fighting the police.
The first section of Fitzpatrick’s essay discusses how Marxism was such an important part to creating classes during the Bolsheviks rule in the beginning of the 20th Century. She notes that this western belief system was popular with Russian intellectuals, especially on revolutionary left. (173) However, around the 1890’s industrialization was starting to catch up with the Marxist dreams, and the first soviets were founded in Moscow and Petersburg in 1905 helped bring down the tsarist regime in February 1917 (Suny 173).
The concept of Stalinism, being the ideologies and policies adopted by Stalin, including centralization, totalitarianism and communism, impacted, to an extent, on the soviet state until 1941. After competing with prominent Bolshevik party members Stalin emerged as the sole leader of the party in 1929. From this moment, Stalinism pervaded every level of society. Despite the hindrance caused by the bureaucracy, the impact of Stalinism was achieved through the implementation of collectivization and the 5-year plans, Stalin’s Political domination and Cultural influence, including the ‘Cult of the Personality’. This therefore depicts the influence of Stalinism over the Soviet State in the period up to 1941.
It can be argued that Leon Trotsky’s naïve personality is what failed him in the attempt to achieve power, but through his intelligence and sturdy leadership, he shaped the Russian and International history to the way it is today. Through his main roles as ‘Commissar for Foreign Affairs’, ‘Commissar for War’ and the political position in the Politburo, Trotsky impacted society by his efforts in control and fight for power, and his aim to spread his communist ideals of ‘comintern’ (Communist
It is undeniable that Stalin had a profound impact on the Soviet Union following Lenin’s death. His rise to power within the Soviet Union has provided historians with a hotbed of political intrigue for many years. He was an opportunist, coming to dominance by manipulating party politics and influential figures in the politburo to eliminate his opposition by recognising and exploiting their weaknesses thus becoming the dominant leader of the Soviet Union. He was severely underestimated by other members of the Politburo about his potential within the party, leading to missed opportunities to ally and stand against him- a mistake that Stalin never made. He gained support from the public by exploiting the idea of ‘the Cult of Lenin’ in 1924 at Lenin’s funeral, and then adopting this concept for himself, thereby likening himself to Lenin; and, more importantly, gained support from other party members by following the wishes of Lenin, for example, initially supporting the continuation of the NEP and supporting the idea of factionalism. This essay will also argue that he was ideologically flexible as he was able to change his ideas for the party according to who he needed as an ally, in order to achieve dominant status in the party. He sought out which individual was the biggest threat, and eliminated them before they could stand against him.
The Russian Revolution is a widely studied and seemingly well understood time in modern, European history, boasting a vast wealth of texts and information from those of the likes of Robert Service, Simon Sebag Montefiore, Allan Bullock, Robert Conquest and Jonathan Reed, to name a few, but none is so widely sourced and so heavily relied upon than that of the account of Leon Trotsky, his book “History of the Russian Revolution” a somewhat firsthand account of the events leading up to the formation of the Soviet Union. There is no doubt that Trotsky’s book, among others, has played a pivotal role in shaping our understanding of the events of The Revolution; but have his personal predilections altered how he portrayed such paramount