Who Is Lenin Responsible For The Downfall Of Bolsheviks

From the initial seizure of power in 1917 until 1924, the Bolsheviks were confronted with a series of crises that threatened their ability to control and govern in Russia. The response and resolutions to these crises included Initial Reforms, Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Civil War, Red terror, War Communism and the NEP. Under the leadership of Lenin, the execution of these responses were made possible and the Bolsheviks were able to maintain and expand their power. The Civil War however was the direct consequence of the Bolshevik’s actions as they tried to maintain their grasp on power. The victory in the Civil War was extremely pivotal for the Bolshevik consolidation of power as it brought control and power but more importantly it eliminated

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.

Trotsky’s overall role in the Soviet Union is indisputable as his strategic leadership skills enabled him to play a fundamental role in the organisation and implementation of the November 1917 Bolshevik seizure of power and the Civil War of 1918-21. However, the importance of Lenin’s role must also be taken into account to achieve a more balanced portrayal, as many of Trotsky’s successes were based on Lenin’s initiatives. Although Lenin held authority over the Bolshevik’s, it

n March 2nd 1917, the rule of a 300-year-old dynasty was laid to rest as Tsar Nicholas II signed his warrant for abdication, officially sanctioning the end of the Romanov Dynasty. The immediate cause permitting this action was the success of the February Revolution however; this event evolved because of several internal and external factors, both long and short term in nature. Predominant among all we recognise the perpetuation of an outdated system of rule, the repercussions of rapid industrialisation, emerging doctrines of liberalism, political inflexibility and the vices imposed by the First World War. These factors progressively embellished societal discontent among the Russian people and inexorably stimulated the insurrection of the February Revolution.

The Russian Civil War raged from 1918 until the start of 1921. During this time the Bolsheviks faced massive opposition to their rule in the form of the White Armies, led by the former officers of the Tsarist state, and also from intervention by the forces of foreign countries. The Bolsheviks were surrounded, and often outnumbered by their opponents. At times, their situation seemed hopeless. Yet, by the start of 1921, the Bolsheviks had defeated their enemies and gained a complete victory. This victory can be attributed to the party’s aims, leadership, geography, and support.

The Failure of the Provisional Government and the Rise of the Bolsheviks i. Subject of investigation. How did the failure of the Provisional Government allow for the rise of the Bolsheviks? ii. Methods to be used. 1.

more ‘consciousness’, discipline or order.  Elemental forces raged.” (Page 430)  Although the people said that they were going against the petty bourgeoisie there was no attacks made against the Capitalist Ministers.

With the October revolution in 1917, Lenin managed to execute a successful coup d’état against the provisional government of Russia and with the death of the constituent assembly early 1918; Lenin and his Bolsheviks had finally control over Russia. However this was just the beginning of various problems he would be facing. This raised the debate on whether Lenin could deal with these problems or not. Many of the quarrels originated from the Tsar’s regime and the provisional government such as Russia’s participation in WW1 as well as economic underdevelopment. Immediate problems such as the raging civil war existed as

In March of 1921 the Red Army stormed the naval garrison in Kronstadt eliminating what the Bolsheviks perceived as a threat. The relationship the Bolsheviks had with these fanatical men was forever severed. The sailors making up the elite unite based in Kronstadt were fanatics that declared their independence in May 1917. It was this same group that would support the Bolshevik’s attempt to overthrow the Provisional Government. This group would fight alongside Lenin in the mistaken belief they were striving for the same goals.

His publication of The History of the Russian Revolution to Brest-Litovsk was a key document during this period of Bolshevik leadership. Although flawed in objectivity, he promotes the primary data in support of a legitimate rise to power of the Bolsheviks and not the contrarian opinion of a coup de taut manipulated by a few charismatic and powerful leaders among the revolutionary forces. Unfortunately, three troubling areas that cloud the history skewed Trotsky’s initial works. First, his historical lenses were blinded by personal political ambitions during the time the history was occurring. It is very difficult for a historian who lives “during the time” to maintain objectivity, gather all relevant information, and ultimately populate this information into a legitimate historical review. Acknowledging that any primary data Trotsky added to the interpretation of events is by default a significant strain on objectivity and accuracy. Secondly, he was by his own admission promoting propaganda to the west and more specifically Germany. Although he firmly believed the history of the revolution as he documented it, by default the historical blindness was overwhelming. Finally, as an exile and aging historian, he published The Revolution Betrayed. With a few decades to reflect on events, elucidate other data, and incorporate other theories, Trotsky holds true to his historical analysis of

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

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.

Bolsheviks was due to the failure of the Provisional Government in response to land policies; their failure to gain support from the masses; the lack of ‘real’ authority of the Provisional Government and the military failure of the army. Secondly, the failure of the

Although, we must remember, that Lenin had incorrectly pushed for an unsuccessful revolution in July. Lenin is famed to have said, 'History will not forgive us if we do not assume power,' Lenin chose, successfully, when to seize power. The Weaknesses of the Provisional Government were as much, if not more to blame than the successes of the Bolsheviks for the Socialist Revolution. The Provisional Government was delicate by its very nature, it was not democratically elected, it was illegitimate, and had no mandate to rule.

The Russian Revolution of 1917 is a collective term for two so-called revolutions—one in February and one in October—that occurred in Russia in 1917, which dismantled the Tsarist autocratic regime and led to the creation of the Soviet Union and, ultimately, several decades of communist dominance. While the world “revolution” is often used to encompass events in both February and October in 1917, only the first actually merits the name. The February Revolution was a mass spontaneous event that overthrew the autocracy of Tsar Nicholas, while the events that occurred in October that led to the overthrow of the government set up in the aftermath of the February Revolution, were tightly controlled and executed in the style of a coup d’état.