The Bolsheviks used the October Revolution to take power in Russia, though they did not have the support of everyone in the country and a lot of the support they did have came not from the people of Russia agreeing with them but instead through a lack of choice politically.

To answer the question of just how popular were the Bolsheviks by the time of the October Revolution, the first thing that needs to be considered is who exactly were the Bolsheviks and so what groups would they receive most support from. The Bolsheviks were a political party derived from a Communist group that had based it’s beliefs and ideals upon the teachings of Karl Marx. This group had split into two factions, the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks, the former, led by Lenin, striving for revolution and the latter aiming for reform believing Russia to be ill-prepared for such radical action.

This question is far too broad to answer without considering the opinions of different groups within society, especially as they were a radical party by nature and so would always disagree with other political groups. Lenin’s party was called the Bolsheviks meaning ‘majority’ though this is not always the case when all the groups in Russian society are considered. Of course the Bolsheviks had massive popularity with the working class in urban areas. These workers had become highly politicised in the months before the October Revolution and had turned towards radical ideas, such as those presented by the Bolsheviks. The evidence for this is apparent when the results for the Moscow municipal elections are considered. In July the Bolsheviks received only 11% of the votes (75 000 votes) but by October they had 51% of the total votes (198 000 votes). Although they had been largely unknown in the countryside the Bolsheviks received a massive rise in support from the peasants in September. This may not be true support, merely support through default, but this will be explored later, though it is irrefutable that the Bolsheviks did become popular with the peasants through their promises to divide land between the poorer classes. The Bolsheviks were very popular with men in the army and the navy. Cells popped up within these forces over the summer greatly increasing the number of members of the Bolshevik Party from 10 000 members in February to 250 000 members in October.

Whilst there is clear evidence that the Bolsheviks were very popular with these groups within Russian society, there is none to show support from the upper classes or the more moderate groups in society. This is because the Bolsheviks were simply not popular with these people. The more moderate groups such as the Kadets and the Mensheviks would not have seen the Bolsheviks in such a favourable light as they saw the Bolsheviks as a group who sought to steal their power and make radical changes rather than opting for the slower change of reform.

Most of the popularity the Bolsheviks enjoyed could be traced back to the significant contributions of Lenin and Trotsky. One of Lenin’s greatest achievements was his use of slogans such as ‘Peace, land and bread’ and ‘All power to the Soviet’. These were so effective in increasing Bolshevik popularity due to their appeal to the masses. They were simple and so could be understood by the largely uneducated people of Russia and emphasised the mains aims of the Bolshevik party. They highlighted the failures of the Provisional Government; the fact that they had not yet divided up the land of the aristocrats, that thousands starved whilst food sat in huge piles by the side of the railways and that Russia was still involved in the First World War. These slogans are responsible for a lot of the working class support the Bolsheviks received as they carried such appeal to these people. However Trotsky’s contribution cannot be overlooked in causing the surge in Bolshevik popularity. After the failure of the ‘July Days’ Bolshevik popularity levels were very low but it is at this point when Trotsky made his greatest contribution to the party. After the Bolsheviks had helped defend Petrograd against General Kornilov he capitalised on the wave of support it created by pushing himself to the forefront of the attention. He used the popularity to get himself elected to the post of President of the Petrograd Soviet and this sudden shift of power created further popularity for the party. The actions and machinations of these two men created most of the popularity that the Bolsheviks enjoyed.

However most of the Bolshevik’s popularity came from people’s disillusionment with other political parties, rather than the strengths of the Bolsheviks though they were very clever in capitalising on the failures of the others. The whole appeal of the aforementioned Bolshevik slogans was that they reminded people how the Provisional Government had kept Russia in the war and it’s people hungry and landless. The Bolsheviks would have been popular with the urban working class to a certain extent regardless of the government, as one of the Bolshevik ideals was to support the workers in a revolution. However in the last few months before the October Revolution they became massively popular with the workers largely due to the failures of the Provisional Government. They were angry about the amount of production they had to do for the war and how they were still being told how to run the factories when they thought by now they would be running them. At this point the workers became politicised, staging strikes and other protests, and found themselves drawn to the Bolsheviks and their ideas in even greater numbers than before. In effect the failures of the Provisional Government and their anger at the Mensheviks lack of action drove them to supporting the Bolsheviks. Bolshevism was almost unheard of in the countryside yet they did become very popular there due to the failures of the Provisional Government. When the peasants became impatient, and could no longer wait for the Provisional Government to do as they had promised and divide up the land, they turned to rioting and seized the land. Whilst they did not necessarily support the Bolsheviks, the peasants did become enamoured with the promises the Bolsheviks made and so their popularity, and that of their close allies, the left-wing Socialist Revolutionaries, grew in the countryside.

The Bolsheviks also became the most popular party by default with groups such as the army because they were the only party who looked as if they would make the move to Soviet-control rather than just speculate on the subject, as the Mensheviks were doing. The Bolshevik slogan ‘All power to the Soviet’ perhaps mislead these soldiers who helped make the Bolsheviks more popular as it made it seem like the soviet would take control rather than implement a one-party state. These people may have not necessarily supported the Bolsheviks but they became popular with them, as they seemed to be promising a move toward Soviet-control.

The Bolsheviks went through periods of great popularity and real derision in the year leading up to the October Revolution. At the time of the October Revolution the Bolsheviks were very popular with certain groups within Russian society, but obviously being a radical party they had certain groups who did not approve of them. Through the contributions of Lenin and Trotsky, who used slogans and precise political timing, the Bolsheviks became very popular with groups such as the workers in the cities, on their ideals alone. However most of their popularity came through default such as the peasants who would not necessarily supported them but did like their promises for immediate action.

Overall, the Bolsheviks were not as popular at the time of the October Revolution as they would later claim. Whilst they did have support from certain groups who shared their radical views, more moderate people, even other Communists such as the Mensheviks, did not support them. They did become slightly more popular in the months before the Revolution through the failures of the Provisional Government and this gave them the momentum to help carry out the October Revolution. However to say they were nationally popular would be an embellishment of the truth, as they did have their supporters but they were not as numerous as Lenin would later state. B.M.

Print friendly version of the essay

Printer friendly version

How well did Lenin deal with the problems and threats facing him in the first months in power?

Why were the opponents of the Bolsheviks unable to defeat them in the Civil War?

The Whites is the general term given to the opponents of the Bolsheviks during the Civil War period of 1918-21. They were made up of several different groups of people, including the liberals, former Tsarists, nationalists and separatists, Socialist Revolutionaries and other moderate socialists. These groups had very little in common, except a hatred for the Bolsheviks, and what they were doing to Russia. The reasons for why they wanted to be rid of the Bolsheviks differed from group to group. The Socialist Revolutionaries didn’t like the way that the Bolsheviks were leading Russia away from democracy. Meanwhile, many Tsarists and aristocrats wanted a return of the dictatorship of the Tsar. The Whites faced almost certain loss in 1920, but the Treaty of Riga of March 1921 put the final nail in the coffin. There were several reasons for this loss. Partly, it was due to the strength of the Reds, but it was also caused by several weaknesses of the White armies.

One of these reasons for the White’s inability to win was the divided leadership of the White armies. There were several, completely separate armies under the White banner. The main armies were Admiral Kolchak’s in the east, Yudenich’s in the northwest, and Denikin’s (later replaced by Wrangel) in the south. These armies all wanted to get rid of the Bolsheviks, but if this were achieved, they would have wanted to take control of Russia themselves with their view in place. As a result, there was virtually no co-operation between them. They fought independently, making it easier for Red forces to beat them one-by-one. Proof of this is that at no point in the war did any of these major armies actually make a joint offensive on specific points. Instead, they just each tried to earn individual victories. This was a large factor of the fact that they were unable to defeat the Bolsheviks. While the Reds were well organised and united, the Whites were uncoordinated. They couldn’t beat the Bolsheviks individually but may have had a better chance of success if they had effectively joined together.

Another reason why the opponents of the Bolsheviks were unable to win was the geography of the war. The sheer size of Russia worked against the Whites. It was 6400km from east to west, and 3000km from north to south. This was especially significant due to the fact that the armies were divided, as it meant that it was very difficult to communicate and coordinate attacks (which had to be done with an officer on horseback). But as well as that, the vastness of Russia meant that they had to move their troops and supplies over huge distances, making it difficult to maintain control. While the Reds were centralised around the main industrial cities, the Whites were scattered across Russia. The areas under Bolshevik control were the most heavily populated and as the Reds introduced conscription, it left them with a much larger army than many if the White armies. The geography of Russia, and the position that the Reds had taken up made it very difficult for the opponents of the Bolsheviks to win, as it made communication extremely hard. If the war had covered less ground, it would have been easier for the White armies to coordinate, but with the large distances, this communication would have been very slow.

The Reds had better morale in the army than their opponents. This was for several reasons. One of the main reasons was Trotsky and his team of antagonizers who got troops worked up and ready to fight. It may also have been partly down to the Reds use of special troops armed with large guns and orders to machine-gun deserters. The knowledge that the Reds couldn’t desert would have meant that their troops had to fight the opponents of the Reds or face an even higher chance of death than the war. This means that they may have been more focussed on fighting against the Whites. As well as this, they were fighting for a very definite cause, as opposed to the Whites who fought for different causes. Leaders in the White armies were generally not very good. Kolchak was an accomplished admiral on the seas, but had no experience of wars on land. As well as this, Socialist Revolutionaries gave him the title of ‘Supreme Ruler’, before he turned round and had hundreds of them rounded up and arrested. Socialist Revolutionaries therefore decided to undermine Kolchak at every opportunity. Several others were cruel and treated their men with contempt. They reminded soldiers of the terrible days of the Tsarist army, leading to little warmth towards leaders. This meant that there were higher desertion rates amongst the Whites. If the opponents of the Reds were going to win the war, they would have needed to have a determined army, who strongly supported the cause, and wanted to win, instead of the deserters that there were. It is true that there were a large number of desertions in the Red army (4 million by 1921), there were more in the Whites camp. The lack of morale of the opponents of the Bolsheviks must have aided their inability to win the war. If the troops had been more determined, they would have had more numbers fighting against the Reds, and would also by more driven to win.

The opponents of the Bolsheviks weren’t necessarily the most popular side during the war. In fact, the Reds were often seen as the lesser of two evils, due to the fact that the Whites often behaved with great brutality and cruelty. The Reds often had the support of the peasants despite the fact that the peasants often resisted requisitioning of grain and resented losing their best horses to the war effort, they were much preferred to the Whites. They burned down entire towns, destroyed property and stole. They took peasant farmer’s crops and livestock by force and tortured and executed any who resisted. This was then focussed on by Bolshevik propaganda. Inevitably, due to this, many peasants, who made up a large proportion of both the armies of the Whites and the Reds, hated and feared the Whites. As well as this, many of the members of the White army were supporters of the Tsarist system that would mean that the peasants would have to give up their newly acquired land. In fact, Kolchak even gave estates to landlords who hadn’t even own it in the first place. While the peasants didn’t like the Reds due to conscription, the Bolsheviks had legitimised their land, which was still better than the Whites. The peasants were a key part of the support during the war, as they gave troops, as well as much needed supplies of food. If they favoured the Bolsheviks, the Whites wouldn’t have done very well in a drawn out war, as they would have run out of supplies.

In conclusion, there were a lot of different factors contributing to the opponents of the Bolsheviks having an apparent inability to win the Civil War. The Reds were simply superior to them in a number of ways. They had a better situation, as they were united around the main industrial cities of Russia where the highest populace was, whereas the Whites were dispersed across the rural land of Russia. The Reds were determined to win and well organised, while the Whites lacked morale, with groups undermining others such as Kolchak and the Socialist Revolutionaries. Trotsky superbly led the Reds through the war, while the leaders of the White armies were often terrible leaders and hated by their own troops. Peasants favoured the Reds over the Whites. War Communism gave the Reds vital resources, while peasants angrily fought the Whites off their land. For them to defeat the Reds, it would have taken severe differences in all of these factors. Victory was in no way assured by the Reds, but the Whites did themselves no favours, while the Reds exploited the weaknesses of their opponents. M.M

Civil War broke out in Russia due to the Bolshevik’s reluctance to share power and the fact that initially they only had limited control of Russia. The conflict began in the summer of 1918 and involved the Bolsheviks who were known as the Reds, their political enemies who were known as the Whites and the so-called Greens. Despite the Bolsheviks dwindling support and Lenin’s poor decision making, why was it that the whites were unable to overcome the Reds?

The Whites were formed from different groups such as Liberals, former tsarists, nationalists and separists, which meant that they had diverse aims. This was a significant factor that contributed towards them being unable to defeat the Bolsheviks and win the civil war. The only aspect of their aims that was corresponding was that they were all anti-bolshevik. The whites were divided with regards to their aims, the liberals supported military dictatorship until law and order was re-established whereas the socialist revolutionaries sought the Constituent Assembly to control and operate Russia. They were unconcerned about winning the favour of the people of Russia and were inexpert in politics; they were unaware that war was in fact an additional feature of politics. Due to the division within the Whites, it was not uncommon for white armies to fight each other; it was this lack of unity that meant the Whites were unable to defeat the Bolsheviks and win the Civil War.

Although the Whites were divided in their views and aims concerning the governing and operation of Russia, in retrospect foreign intervention should have increased their chances of becoming victorious in the Civil War. Countries such as Britain, France, Japan and the USA sent troops to help the Whites defeat the Bolsheviks. Britain sent £100 million worth of supplies, as Churchill viewed the Whites as crusaders and therefore supported them. A large amount of the support was not due to fact that they felt the need to help; many of their countries had their own interests at heart. The French were keen to stop the Bolsheviks as they had put millions of francs into Russia, the Bolsheviks had then nationalised foreign-owned business without compensation. The Japanese also had different reasons for sending forces to Russia; they took the opportunity to seize valuable territory, rather than fighting the Bolsheviks. The USA also had their own agenda for joining the Civil War; they sent troops to the same area as Japan to prevent them from seizing any land. The general participation of the other countries was unenthusiastic, which therefore made their contributions futile for the Whites. The troops that were sent were tired of war and there was no support from the public. The only way in which the allies were useful was for the supplies that were given to the whites; the soldiers played no part in any serious military action. Foreign intervention should have worked in the White’s favour, and to a certain extent it did, providing them with supplies and weapons however due to its ineffectiveness it presented the Reds with the opportunity to use it against them. The Bolsheviks produced propaganda using this, portraying themselves as defenders of Russian soil against the foreign forces. One red poster depicts the white generals Denikin, Kolchak and Yendenich as slavering dogs under the influence and control of the Western interventionalist leaders.

In addition to the failure of foreign intervention, geographical factors also created and highlighted issues for the Whites. Strategically the position of the Reds was highly advantageous for them; they held the central area including Petrograd and Moscow. The benefits of being in close proximity to the central areas included that they were heavily populated compared with the White-held areas; this resulted in the Reds being able to conscript more men to fight and outnumber the Whites. Trotsky was able to move troops and supplies swiftly to areas under attack by means of an armoured train. As the Commissar for War, this enabled him to visit the battlefront and take personal command of the troops. The Bolsheviks moved the capital to Moscow, which was central to the railway network and allowed them to transport men and equipment to the battlefronts. The Bolsheviks also had access to more war materials than the Whites, as they were situated near armament factories in Russia. The vast majority of all artillery, rifles and military equipment went to the Bolsheviks, which meant that the Whites heavily relied on the supplies from the allied countries. The position of the Whites was relatively detrimental to their campaign against the Bolsheviks as they were strewn around the edges of the central areas, isolated by large distances. As a result of their unfortunate location communications proved to be problematic, particularly when moving men and weapons and formulating the attacks of the various White armies. To communicate messages amongst the various armies, they had to use officers on horseback, as they had no telephone links.

As well as the poor positioning of the Whites, other factors that contributed to their failure include inadequate leadership and military discipline. The Whites had an astonishing level of indiscipline and corruption; Denikin even stated “I can do nothing with my army,” which demonstrated that the generals were aware of the weaknesses and inabilities within their troops. At Kolchak’s base, uniforms and munitions that had been supplied by foreign interventionists such as Britain were sold via the black market. Officers of the White armies often lived in brothels and indulged in vodka and cocaine, which illustrated the corruption and disarray of the white armies, which was not improved upon by their leading generals. The White leaders were generally second rate, many were cruel and treated the men in the armies with disdain, which was reminiscent of the Russian army and the tsarist rule. This resulted in there being very little support for them, and was the cause of many people deserted the White armies. In contrast, Trotsky was an excellent leader for the Bolsheviks, as he was courageous and took special forces to the battlefronts where the military action was fiercest. He had the ability to motivate and stimulate the men in the Red Army, which was a huge asset to the Bolsheviks as their inspired army was much more effective compared with that of the Whites.

The support from the peasants was a vital factor of the Civil War as they supplied the majority of soldiers for both the Reds and Whites. Although the soldiers had little love for either side and were just as likely to desert the Reds as from the White armies to which they had been conscripted. Lenin had legitimised their right to the land whilst the Whites made it clear that land would be restored to its previous owners, this resulted in the peasants being more inclined to support the Reds. The White leaders sought to restore the Russian empire with its pre-1917 borders, this provoked separatists such as the Ukrainians who were in search of more autonomy in their affairs or complete independence. This resulted in their refusal to support the Whites, when White forces were based in their territory. Urban workers and peasants wanted to defend the gains of 1917; the Reds seemed to offer them the best possibility to do this.

Not only were the shortcomings of the Whites a major factor of their defeat, the strengths of the Bolsheviks also contributed towards the Whites being unable to win the Civil War. The Reds had better leadership in the form of Trotsky, who provided them with support and equipment to aid the fighting at the Battlefronts. The Reds also made use of propaganda, whereas the majority of the Whites did not see its value. The Reds used imaginative and emotive imagery to gather support from the peasants and urban workers, which was essential to their campaign. The Bolshevik’s army was unified and effective in contrast with that of the Whites, which made it much easier for them to work together to achieve success. The Bolsheviks positioned themselves better than the Whites, which made communication a great deal easier and the central areas also provided them with men that they could conscript.

Despite the fact that the Red army was hastily assembled, the Whites could not defeat them in the Civil War, this was the result of a number of contributing factors. The Whites were divided and all had different aims and agendas, which meant that at times they fought each other rather than the enemy. They were also poorly positioned, which made communication difficult and also gave the Reds an advantage over them. The poor leadership and discipline of the White armies also meant that there were a large number of deserters, as well as corruption. The Whites should have been helped by the foreign intervention; however these countries were tired of war, which made their involvement ineffective and apathetic. The strengths of the Reds also meant that it was difficult for the Whites to overcome them; they were united and had a strong leadership in the form of Trotsky. Their positioning meant that they had an advantage over the Whites; they were able to gather support and also conscript men into their army. The factor that contributed most to the White’s defeat was the poor leadership, if stronger more effective leaders had led them there may have been less corruption and perhaps more organisation, which would have allowed them to defeat the Reds and become triumphant in the civil war. J.R.

Why did the economic policies adopted between 1918 and 1920 arouse opposition within the Bolshevik Party and the USSR?

The Bolsheviks had many policies, which they approved in 1918 and 1920, like War Communism and the NEP, new economic policy. These policies caused opposition within the Bolshevik party and amongst other groups of Russian people, due to many reasons.

War Communism was the economic policy, which was set up in 1918 by the Bolsheviks during the Russian Civil War. The aim of War Communism was to keep the Red Army and towns supplied with weapons and food, and the Red Army needed supplies for the war. War Communism began in June 1918 and was enforced by the Vesenkha, which was the Supreme Council of National Economy.War Communism had many features, such as, grain requisitioning, banning of private trade, nationalisation of industry, labour discipline and rationing. Grain requisitioning, was when the Bolsheviks sent Red Guards to the countryside to find grain, then in May 1918 a Food Supplies dictatorship was set up so grain could be forcibly seized off of the peasants. In 1933, 25 million tons of grain was collected, and this was only just enough to reach the demand. Grain requisition was very unpopular amongst the peasants as they could not make any money by selling their grain and did not have enough to eat as their grain had been given to the Red Guards. Also if the peasants refused to give their grain they were often harmed or killed. The red guards on the other hand were very much for grain requisitioning as it meant they got supplies of food. They were many uprisings though amongst the angered peasants.

Private Trade and manufacture were banned. However, this lead to the state trading organisation being unable to produce enough consumer goods. This meant a black market developed and many people were able to get money by selling goods and also many people were able to buy goods and food, if they had enough money. However it still meant that private business owners, suffered as they were banned and unable to make any money, this caused opposition against War Communism and the Bolsheviks policies. Also workers lost their jobs and this meant they were not earning any money to live on.

As well as banning private trade the industries that were still allowed were nationalised and bought under state control, and governed by the Vesenkha. Single managers that reported to the central authorities replaced workers’ Committees. Many people were opposed to the nationalisation of industry and business owners could not benefit from profits made from their businesses as it went to the state. However some business owners asked for their factory to be nationalised it was the only way to stop their business from being closed down. Further to nationalising industry, the discipline in the work place became very strict. Workers were fined if they were late for work or were lazy. Internal passports were made to stop workers from being able to escape to the country. Also many workers were beaten or killed if they did not turn up for work. The only way the workers could get food was by being given a workbook which when signed enabled them to get their rations. However if they did not work hard enough their books would not be signed and they would not receive any rations. The discipline was very strict and this caused many workers to oppose the policies that the Bolsheviks had adopted and felt that they were not trying to help the situation, as many workers were not getting enough rations, and were having to deal with poor working conditions and low pay.

As well as rationing being introduced to workers, they were also introduced to red Army soldiers, civil servants and professional people, like doctors. Also rations were given to the burzhui. The Red Army were given larger rations, the rations given to civil servants were much smaller and the middle class were given barely enough to live on. The introduction of rationing upset many people and created a lot of opposition towards the Bolsheviks and their policies. The middle class were especially angry by this policy as they had been used to living life comfortably and were now barely being able to survive by the inadequate supply of rations which they were receiving. The middle class also had their homes seized or they had to share them with workers, and they were not allowed to work. The middle class lost everything, which made them oppose and not agree with the Bolsheviks policies. In addition toindustry being controlled, railways were controlled and agriculture. Organisations such as the SEC were set up. The Supreme Economic Council had the right to confiscate and requisition. Also the glavki were responsible for thousands of factories. The Commissariat of Transport controlled the railways and The Commissariat of Agriculture controlled what the peasants did. The Bolsheviks insured that many aspects of the Russian people’s lives were controlled; this caused a lot of disagreement within the Russians, as they had no freedom.The economy suffered quite badly, because of War Communism and banning private business and nationalising industry, by 1921 the rouble had dropped in value dramatically and caused inflation to increase. Also taxes were abolished except for the ‘Extraordinary Revolutionary Tax’, however this was only targeted at the rich and not the workers, which upset the rich, as they were the only ones that had to pay tax.

Overall War Communism was a disaster and very unpopular amongst many different people. Peasant farmers could only grow enough grain for themselves as if they grew more it would be seized by the state and given to the Red army this made the peasants very angry and against the Bolshevik policies, as they were unable to make a profit from selling their grain. Industrial cities were also being starved of food as the grain was given straight to the armies. If there was a bad harvest as well it would be disastrous and starvation and malnutrition was common. Many people who lived in the cities moved to the countryside, to try and grow food for themselves so they could survive. Between 1916 and 1920 the cities and northern and central Russia lost 33% of their population to the countryside. Large factories were just producing 18% of their 1913 figure. Coal production was at 27% of its 1913 figure in 1920. In the countryside most land was being used to grow food so there was a huge drop in cotton production between 1913 and 1920 by 87%.

War Communism was unpopular, even though the Russian people were easily manipulated by the Bolsheviks as they managed to convince them that it was the failings of the whites that had caused the problems with War Communism and if there were any strikes Lenin quickly got the rebellions locked up. The Bolsheviks also blamed all of Russians problems on the Whites as they controlled the areas, which would have supplied the factories with produce. No foreign countries were prepared to trade with Russia, under Bolshevik control, as they were against their policies so foreign trade did not exist. Even though the Bolsheviks were good at putting the blame on others, soon it came clear to the Russian people and many strikes and uprisings took place in Tambov and in Siberia. Even the Bolsheviks Krondstadt sailors were against the policies, they realised that the ideals that they were fighting for were not what they thought they were fighting for in the first place, and were on the verge of rebellion. Overall War Communism was unpopular; the peasants could not make a profit and were living with hardly any food and money. The Middle Class lost everything and were living off of very inadequate amounts of rations. Many people became unemployed due to small businesses being closed down and business owners lost money due to their businesses being closed down. The workers that worked in nationalised industries had very poor working conditions and poor rations. Also Kronstadt sailors began to disagree with the Bolshevik policies. There were many riots and rebellions. Also there was disagreement within the Bolshevik Party as Lenin said War Communism enabled the soldiers to win, Bolshevik members were against this idea and the fact that Trade Unions were controlled, also some Bolsheviks believed that their policies were going against Bolshevik Vvalues. Socialist Revolutionaries were also against the policies made by the Bolsheviks and attempted to assassinate Lenin and kidnap Dzerzhinsky, who was the leader of the Cheka. Also in the summer of 1918, the Red Terror occurred, Lenin sent the Cheka to arrest Socialist Revolutionaries, Mensheviks and imprison them. On the 17 th July 1918 the Tsar and family were shot and killed, the Bolsheviks denied to having anything to do with it. This made many Tsar supporters angry and the Bolsheviks and their policies were becoming very unpopular, therefore Lenin decide to replace War Communism with the New Economic Policy.

On March 21 st, 1921, the New Economic Policy, NEP, replaced War Communism. The policies of the NEP were that grain requisitioning was abolished, small businesses were reopened, the ban on private trade was eradicated and the state controlled heavy industries. Grain requisitioning was replaced by a tax, instead of having their grain seized from them, peasants had to give a fixed proportion of their grain to the state, however the amount they gave to the state was less than what was requisitioned, they could then sell any surpluses they had for profit. The peasants could then make money for themselves and make a living, the peasants therefore agreed with this policy as it meant life was looking more prosperous. However this did cause opposition from the upper class as they did not like to see the peasants doing well for themselves, and also members of the Bolshevik party thought that by letting the peasants make profits for themselves, was going against Bolshevik values.Small businesses that were under private ownership were allowed to reopen and make a profit. This meant Business owners were able to sell their produce to make a benefit and they were able to compete against other business owners. This policy suited small business owners as it meant they had the freedom again to make a living. However many Bolsheviks did not like this idea as it was going against Marxism and the Bolsheviks policies and was making Russia become more Capitalist.

Private Trade was allowed once more and this meant food and goods could easily be exchanged between the cities and the countryside. Private owned shops were allowed to reopen and rationing was stopped and people had to buy their food from their income. This meant people had to fend for themselves and they had a chance again to make something of themselves, they were not able to get rations anymore but they were able to work where they wanted and independently and therefore could afford to buy their own goods and food. Russia’s economy was increasing and the majority of the Russian people liked the new policies as it gave them the chance to earn a reasonable income and set up their own businesses. Many Bolshevik members opposed the New Economic Policy, as they saw it turning Russia into a Capitalist country, where people could make a profit for themselves.Even though small businesses were allowed to reopen the state still controlled the large industries such as coal, oil and steel. They also stayed in control of transport and the banking system. Industries were put into trusts, they had to buy the materials they needed and also pay their workers out of their own budgets. Also if the industries needed financial support the state would not bail them out. Industries were much more independent and had to support themselves. Many business owners agreed with these policies, as it meant they got to compete against other industries and try and make a profit for themselves.

The New Economic policy was successful, even though it was unpopular with many Bolshevik members, agricultural production increased greatly, this was due to the fact that farmers could sell their surpluses for a profit and this was an incentive for them to produce more crops. As well as agricultural production increasing, small factories were also beginning to increase output, from 1920 to 1923 factory output rose by almost 200%. Private owned shops, cafes and restaurants reopened, and Russian people were getting back to their normal lives. However the government was still running large-scale, heavy industry and banks and because they did not really believe in the policy of industrialisation, the agricultural sector was growing much faster than the industrial sector. Therefore to be able to keep their income high, industries increased their product prices, three times higher than the agricultural prices. However because of the increase in costs of the manufactured goods, peasants had to produce much more wheat to be able to purchase consumer goods. The fall in agricultural prices and the increase in industrial goods was known as the Scissors Crisis. Peasants decided then to not sell their surpluses until they could sell them for higher prices or they sold them to NEPmen, which was the name given to tradesmen men, they then sold the produce on at high prices. Many members of the Communist Party did not agree with NEPmen as they thought they exploited urban consumers. To help stabilise the prices of consumer goods, the government tried to tackle inflation and fixed prices to stop the scissor effect.

Even though many workers, peasants/farmers and business owners benefited from the NEP and were pleased with the policies as they gave them a chance to be independent and make a profit for themselves, many members of the Bolshevik party were very much against the policy and it caused opposition within the party. Some party members thought the NEP was betraying the principles of the October Revolution, also they believed the new economic policy, had very capitalist ideas as it let people be independent and run their own businesses, the new policy did not have Marxists ideas, when the Bolsheviks were meant to follow the ideas of Marx. Also many members saw the NEP as a betrayal of communist principles and they thought that in the long-term it would have a negative effect on the economy. The NEPmen were seen as threat, as they were very successful tradesmen and under Bolshevik beliefs everyone was meant to be equal and not be more successful than others. However the members of the Bolsheviks realised that the party could result in losing power if they carried on the way they were, as there were splits in the party. They did want the Bolsheviks to be united again; so decided the NEP could be a temporary measure. However Lenin said that “The NEP is in its earnest and long-term”. This again caused disagreement within the party. Also the nobles disagreed with the NEP, because it gave the peasants a chance to trade and make a profit.

Overall the policies adopted between 1918 and 1920 aroused opposition within the Bolshevik Party and Russia, this was due to many reasons. Firstly War Communism, which was set up, the policies, which included grain requisitioning, banning of private trade, nationalisation of industry, labour discipline and rationing, upset many people. Peasants lost a lot of their grain and could only grow enough for themselves and were unable to sell any for a profit. Private trade was banned and small businesses were shut down, this angered many business owners who lost a lot of money and could not be independent any more and make their own profit. Industries were nationalised and under state control, so workers had no freedom any more and the only way they could get rations was if they got their workbook signed. Labour was very strict to, workers were shot or beaten if they were late or did not turn up to work. Also everyone had to have rations even the rich and middle class, this upset them as they were not use to living on basic food rations, and the middle class lost everything and had to give or share their homes with workers. Also then the New Economic Policy was set up, however this still caused opposition, as not everyone agreed with the policies. Members of the Bolshevik party believed the NEP was going against Bolshevik policies and the ideas of Marxism and were making Russia’s economy very capitalist, as it was allowing individuals to make a profit and be independent, especially the peasants and farmers. Also they felt NEPmen were becoming too successful when the Bolsheviks should believe in treating everyone equally and not allowing individuals to become more successful than others. Overall the policies made by the Bolsheviks between 1918 and 1920 were unpopular and this was due to many reasons. K.F.

Stalin emerged as the leader of the Bolshevik party in 1929 due to a variety of lucky events and carefully considered political decisions that caused him to eliminate all his opponents, including his most significant rival, Trotsky. Amongst party members Stalin was known as “Comrade Card-Index,” one who assembled and dealt with party paperwork, however they were not aware of “what power [he] was accumulating wherein,” which subsequently brought about their downfall. 

Stalin becoming leader of the USSR in 1929 was greatly aided by him taking on many seemingly boring and undermined positions within the party. However they enabled him to accumulate power and influence throughout the whole Bolshevik party, which proved key to his success and to Trotsky’s downfall.Previous historians saw Stalin’s pre 1924 career as a “dull grey blank” (Nicolai Sukhanov-1922) however recent research has shown it as significant to his uprising. As there were few members in the early Bolshevik days Lenin knew them all well and because he liked Stalin’s excellent organisation he included him as one of the six members of the Central Committee, where he helped make policy and wrote the Pravda. His heritage as being Georgian paid off after the October Revolution when he was made Commissar for Nationalities, this saw the beginning of Stalin becoming the cold hearted and ruthless man which he is infamous for. Stalin was given jobs that other Bolsheviks viewed as tedious and unimportant, none of them “saw in the Stalin of 1923 the menacing and towering figure he was to become,” (I. Deutscher, the Prophet Unarmed). Positions such as the General Secretary and the Liaison Officer between the Politburo and Ogburo he used to his advantage. In both of these positions Stalin gathered personal information about Bolsheviks and built up individual files, which would include information such as character and loyalty. As Stalin also had the power of patronage this enabled him to place certain people in key positions within the party, therefore gaining their support and thus having the influence to oppose any policies he did not agree with, and pass any policies he felt beneficial to his cause. Stalin used his control of party membership to supervise the Lenin Enrolment, which began in 1924; this saw the party membership double with mostly young urban workers and uneducated peasants. This was advantageous to Stalin’s rise to power because they were unlikely to contend with any of his ideology and simply follow the instructions which they were given. Culminating this evidence it is most possible that without these positions and the influence they gave Stalin within the party, he would not have been able to gather sufficient support to aid his rise to power against all opposition (including Trotsky) and succession of Lenin as leader.

Luck has often been attributed to Stalin’s rise to power opposed to Trotsky, as several favourable events which occurred without his influence placed him in very favourable positions. One of these such events occurred immediately after Lenin’s death in 1924, and was Kamenev and Zinoviev preventing his final testament being read out in congress. It could be seen that Stalin insulting Lenin’s wife fuelled the dispute between them and resulted in the insult which was recorded in Lenin’s testament, “I am not sure that he will always know how to use that power with sufficient caution.” As Stalin had used the event of Lenin’s death to portray himself as Lenin’s loyal disciple this would prove lethal to his political success. However because the testament also contained other critical opinions of Zinoviev and Kamenev they preventing it being publicised, saving Stalin in the process. Secondly the death of Dzerzhinsksy in 1926 who was the head of the Cheka and very anti-Stalin allowed Stalin to finally infiltrate the Cheka with some of his supporters, and gain a footing in the most powerful fighting body in the whole of Russia and finally turn them against his opponents. Lastly due to perhaps the increasing threat Lenin felt, if he had not died when he had then Stalin “would probably have been sent to the provinces to work for the party” (M.McCauley, Russia 19179-41). This would have removed Stalin from Petrograd and the Bolshevik head quarters, which would subsequently have removed him from contending with Trotsky when Lenin died. These lucky events aided Stalin greatly in his emergence as leader in 1929, otherwise he may have been crushed by the Cheka, been removed from the political running or been disgraced publicly.

 Although Trotsky had many attributes he also was lacking in characteristics essential for a leader. E.H Carr (Socialism in one country) acknowledged that Trotsky was a “great intellectual, the great administrator; the great orator,” however he also stated he lacked “one quality essential” to be a great political leader. He had no ability and patience to establish support amongst his equals or colleagues of lesser intelligence. He unlike Stalin would not make an effort to give favours and therefore gain support, consequently when it came to votes he always appeared extremely unpopular at Congress. Secondly Trotsky was also resented for being a Jew and for recently joining the Bolshevik party, this was because the majority of the party were anti-Semitist and also felt that new members hadn’t proved their loyalty. As proved in the propaganda war of 1920’s without a power base Trotsky’s abilities were useless against Stalin’s infiltration and support within the party. Trotsky’s odd diffidence and inability to contend against Stalin with the same level of support meant that his efforts to become leader were futile.

 Stalin had a harsh and ruthless character with many attributes which proved important in his succession of Lenin as leader. From a young age Stalin was rebellious, involving himself in terrorist activities and robberies to raise money for the Bolshevik government. He was arrested and escaped from prison a full eight times, which earned him a reputation as a loyal and staunch Bolshevik, and therefore earned him respect. One of Stalin’s childhood friends noted “he was a good friend as long as one submitted to his imperious will,” this quotation indicates that he was determined in his aims and also a very formidable enemy. However after Stalin’s wife’s death he stated that with her went his “last warm feelings for people,” this may be seen as a contribution towards his autocratic and ruthless ruling. However despite Stalin’s commitment, loyalty and dedication towards the Bolshevik ideal he was seen as a “shabby and inarticulate man in the background,” (L. Deutscher – the Prophet Unarmed) one which everyone ignored to focus on the seemingly greater threat of Trotsky. Stalin’s independence and disregard for anyone else ensured that he could without qualms mislead and then crush any of his opponents, for example at Lenin’s funeral Stalin tricked Trotsky into missing it, losing him much favour. Stalin’s strengths of loyalty, ruthlessness, and perseverance enabled him to outmanoeuvre all his opponents and where necessary trick them to their downfall, for example when he initially sided with the Left Bolsheviks, knocked them out and then did the same to the Rights. His personal characteristics were vital for his emergence as a leader opposed to Trotsky, as he had to compete with Trotsky’s excellent orator skills in order to remove him as a threat.

Stalin used the differences between his and Trotsky’s policies to display Trotsky as ridiculous and to promote himself as realistic and someone whose key aim was to protect Russia. Stalin’s policy was named ‘Socialism in One Country’ and focused on consolidating the revolution, modernising Russia and turning the USSR into a defensive state. He opted to move on from the NEP, a set of emergency measures to ensure survival during the civil war that most Bolsheviks were dissatisfied with (seemed a betrayal of their communist ideals). The NEP had served it’s purpose to bring Russia through their time of economic poverty however was preventing industrialisation because it was not producing sufficient grain to make enough money through exportation. During 1913 12 million tonnes of grain was produced, whereas in the years of the NEP the most produced was 3 million, this meant exports were only at 33% and imports at 38%, this was destroying the economy. The fact that most Bolsheviks saw the movement away from the capitalist ideas of the NEP as positive combined with the added threat of invasion (relations with France, Poland, Britain and Japanese had deteriorated) proved Stalin’s plan of industrialisation very popular. Therefore Stalin’s sensible and practical approach to focus on the security of the USSR before attempting permanent revolution showed him as a better candidate that Trotsky to act in the USSR’s best interests and gained him the support which enabled him to succeed.

 Trotsky’s main policy was to encourage a permanent revolution, in which it was the USSR’s role to spread communism to other countries, he also wanted to continue with the NEP, both these factors therefore contributed to his unpopularity within the party. Trotsky believed that the USSR needed to bring communism into other countries because Russia was ‘incapable of holding her own against conservative Europe’, because her working class was too small and economy too underdeveloped. However influenced by Stalin most Bolsheviks saw him as an enemy to the state because he was promoting interference with other countries when Russia was at threat from invasion. Trotsky did not succeed over Stalin because he was unwilling to compromise and appeared to make unintelligent political decisions that would put Russia at stake.  

Stalin during his political uprising sided with both the left and the right side of the Bolshevik party at different times, this political manoeuvring enabled him to wipe out his opponents including Trotsky. Initially Stalin sided with the centre of the party, Zinoniev and Kamenev, however when he suggested ‘Socialism in One Country’ and also supported the NEP he created an alliance with the right side (Bukharin etc) causing Zinoniev and Kamenev to rebel in 1925. It was luck which caused them in 1926 to join with Trotsky against Stalin and encourage mass demonstrations in Moscow, this enabled Stalin to expel all three of his main rivals for factionalism and remove Trotsky from the running for leadership. However in 1928 Stalin turned against the NEP and attacked the right wing of the party, Bukharin stated, “He changes his theories according to whom he needs to get rid of next.” This may seen cruel however it was Stalin’s political manoeuvring which finally enabled him, even if by luck to remove Trotsky as a threat, and allow Stalin to become leader himself.

 In conclusion Stalin emerged as the USSR’s leader in 1929 opposed to Trotsky because of a combination of factors, some pre-planned and some lucky. For example it was due to luck that he was able to initially appear at Lenin’s funeral as his loyal disciple and therefore gain respect and trust, however it was after years of hard work that he was able to use his political positions (such as general secretary) to infiltrate his supporters into key positions. Trotsky however brought about much of his own downfall by being diffident to the extent he allowed Stalin to build up a huge support base vital to his success whereby he made no attempt to make alliances or gain support. E.N.