This disagreement arose because of a profound difference in their beliefs of the role of the party. The Bolsheviks believed that the revolution should be organised by a small group of dedicated and skilled revolutionaries who should lead the party and make all the decisions. On the contrary, the Mensheviks believed that the Party should be a mass party with as many working class members as possible. They argued it should be run democratically, with the members electing the leaders and deciding on its policies. For Lenin, the party was to be a group prepared to seize power as soon as possible yet on the other hand, for Martov, the main purpose of the party was to spread propaganda and raise the level of consciousness of the proletariat.
Lastly, Russia's backward society is one of the main reasons Nicholas II survived after 1905. There were three main groups that opposed the Tsar up until 1905. The Social Democratic Labour Party (SDLP) was a Marxist political party for the industrial workers in Russia. They disliked the Tsar the most, and wanted to wrest control from him and have Russia become the first communist state in the world. However, there was a dispute on how the party should be run.
‘While Lenin traditionally receives all the praise, Trotsky was actually the primary reason why there was a Bolshevik revolution in 1917 and thus deserves the most credit.’ Leon Trotsky, along with Vladimir Lenin played a fundamental role in the 1917 Russian Revolution. There have been many attempts to distort and even to deny the role of Trotsky, especially on the part of the official tyranny historians. Right wing historians such as Richard Pipes see Trotsky as just another demanding leader much the same as Lenin and Stalin. However, the left wing view of Trotsky consists of those who still accept the Stalinist version of events. Isaac Deutscher is one historian who has the contrasting views of the right wing historian, Pipes.
Communists do not stand apart from other workers, but are made up of the most advanced political sections of the working class. Marx says that Communists have been "reproached" for desiring to abolish the "right" of acquiring private property through the fruits of one's labor. However, he points out laborers do not acquire any property through their labor. Marx said " we communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally……..to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence.” (374) Marx wanted to abolish all individuality freedom, and independence. Marx argument was against the "infamous" communist proposal of abolishing the family.
The Chinese Civil War was caused by two opposed political parties, the communists and the nationalists, to see who would be able to restore order and regain central power over China to bring it back to its glory. The crisis between these two forces, which started
The top-down approach the rulers of Russia had in the period 1855-1964 were superficially different as the communists claimed to represent the people by giving power to the proletariat where as the Tsars were heavily elitist in their ideology. The communists’ efforts to represent the people is corroborated by the introduction of the soviet by the Provisional Government, which was organised as a grassroots effort to practice direct democracy. Although the presence of the Zemstva and Duma, introduced by Alexander II and Nicholas II respectively, presents some evidence the Tsars may have attempted to give Russia a sense of democracy, it was ran by the nobility so it was not representative of the people and thus heavily autocratic in their rule. Conversely, although the communists and the Tsars appear to have ruled differently in their top-down approach, they in fact did not because in practice the communists gave an extremely limited extent of power to the proletariat. The Provisional Government’s vacillating rule on the other hand, from heavily autocratic to democratic led to the governments demise.
The Soviets strived for communism, where everyone, at least in principle, had equal shares and no one was above another, while the United states wanted to spread their values of democracy to re-developing countries across the globe. Communism was seen as such a threat to the United States because they believed the Communist Party wanted to spread and take over the entire world and the U.S. insisted that they were a force that must be stopped. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers was a key film, made during this time period that reflected greatly on the themes of the Cold War. In the film the protagonist, Miles, is a once sane, intelligent doctor who has been strung out, by many strange events that indicate an alien invasion is happening into a hysterical man. It starts out with relatives and children accusing loved ones that they’re not really themselves, that they have no emotions.
Assess the view that Lenin's rule between 1917 and 1924 was merely a brutal dictatorship 'Lenin the affable genius or Lenin the irascible tyrant" The two contrasting views which many historians still debate, whether Lenin was simply a mindless dictator or the soviet view which historian Read hints at by the words of "affable genius", in that Lenin's authoritarian rule was simply a way of maintaining control of the proletariat in order to further the socialist cause, and would then change back to communism when able to. Other historians take a different view and agree with Lenin himself when he said that the dictatorship was part of 'adaptations to the prevailing circumstances’, a reference to the substantial social, economic and political problems Russia faced such as extreme famine and the outbreak of civil war in 1918, but due to his strong marxist beliefs, it seemed that a brutal rule was the only option in taming the unrest throughout the country, particularly if he wanted to avoid a repetition of events such as the February revolution. Especially when putting into context, that up until 1917 Russia had endured a repressive tsar regime, which used brutality and force to maintain control, so the population were used to conforming by the threat of violence and judging by Lenins' statement of 'The soviet revolutionary republic will triumph no matter what the cost" it seems that Lenin felt it necessary to continue this ideology in order for Russia to function correctly. The level of brutality that Lenin used though is somewhat questionable, but in incidents such as Kronstadt, where the infamously barbaric Cheka were used to regain control, supports the view that rather that Lenin limiting the brutality of his regime " In fact he wanted the brutality to be as intense as possible in the short term so that it might not need to be unduly extended in time" so even
This theory was made well-liked to people by Karl Marx and Friedrich in their Communist Manifesto, 1848. So it clarifies that in Communism people will have no personal possession to the properties and the society should be equal. The people known as Anti-communists are actually defined for their position in opposition to Communism rather than their deeds and initiatives. These people say that the way of life in Communism is not accepted by anyone as a good one. Anyone alone may say that the way defined in Communism is a wrong way to lead a life and controlling life of someone living in the interior of a specific state is not correct either.
“Marxists indeed advocated that the world should become Communist, but not by hostile takeover. Rather, they advocated a series of national revolutions around the globe which would allow the victorious workers ultimately to join together as one, abolishing the very idea of nationhood. (The