How far does Stalin’s position as General Secretary explain his success in defeating his rivals in the years 1924-29? In 1923, Stalin was the least likely candidate to succeed out of Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin and of course Lenin as leader of the party, this was because although he was important in the administrative function during the civil war, he was not glamorous nor intellectual, unlike Trotsky and Bukharin. Stalin was seen by many as the ‘safe candidate’, and a centrist, who therefore could present himself as a sensible and practical politician. Stalin had been appointed General Secretary of the Communist Party in 1922, entitling him to being responsible for appointing people to key positions within the party, and for any promotions. As he had the powers to do so, he also had the power to sack party members.
With the power that Stalin had now acquired he could appoint new members for the party and demote members of the party. This meant that he also had access to all information on the party members; through this he could effectively build himself a power base. However compared to the other positions in the party the General Secretary was positioned lower and did not have a large input into the politics of the party, it was required to keep track of the members of the politburo. This meant that Stalin did not hold a powerful position and was positioned below his rivals. The position although considered a minor position, placed Stalin in a decent position.
There were many factors in the survival of Tsarist rule from 1881 – 1905. The divisions among it's opponents played a part, as it meant that Tsarist opposition had no common goals, and couldn't work together to achieve it. The October Manifesto is another factor, it split up Nicholas' opposition even further by dividing the Liberals into two groups. Pobedonostsev & his repressive policies played a large part in the Survival of Tsarist autocracy, as he was able to keep the people down, not giving them enough ground to start a successful revolution. Lastly, Russia's backward society is one of the main reasons Nicholas II survived after 1905.
Stalin’s appeal was based on the fact he was the ‘Voice of Moderation’ which appealed to many members across the party whereas other contenders were seen as extreme, therefore they had a narrow base of support. Stalin was well liked within party so he was able to build a large network of supporters. On the other hand contenders like Trotsky and Bukharin adopted extreme positions within the party, which ultimately led to a very narrow base of support. Adopting extreme positions alienated many in the party, allowing Stalin to become leader. Zinoviev was seen by the party as ‘the most despicable individual since Mussolini.’ He was considered vain and arrogant with very limited political success, so he was unable to challenge Stalin’s authority alone.
How far do you agree with the view that in the years 1933-39, Hitler was a ‘weak dictator’? As Source 5 states, ‘Hitler can be said to have been a ‘weak dictator.’ Much historical debate surrounds the view of whether he can be considered a powerful leader. He was arguably dependent on his own popularity, with his indecisiveness and government inaction being a consequence of this. The chaotic structure of the Nazi Party also illustrates the weaknesses he faced as a dictator. However, as shown in Source 6, Hitler was a ‘central figure’ and thus can be considered a strong leader.
These views are expressed in his two key works, A Concise History of the Russian Revolution (published in 1995) and Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime 1919-1924 (published in 1994). Pipe’s believes that Lenin was primarily responsible for the success of the uprising, even though Pipe’s recognizes Lenin’s role as the most important, he still hypocritically called Lenin’s April Theses “totally out of touch with reality, if not positively mad” despite the fact that this theses played a huge role in the Lenin and Bolshevik uprising. Pipe’s also believes that Trotsky just carried out Lenin’s commands. However the role or Trotsky and his actions before the October revolution were very evidently done on his own accord, with Lenin accompanying Trotsky in his decisions. In early October, 1917, Trotsky was elected
To what extent was Lenin’s victory in the Civil War due to the weakness of his opposition? Lenin and the Bolsheviks’ victory in the Civil War cannot be given one main reason. A combination of the weakness of the whites and the strengths of the reds eventually led to the victory of Lenin and the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks were provided with strong leadership, ruthlessness, the Red Army fighting for them and most importantly: the geography of Russia. Whereas, the White army was faced with: a divided leadership, low moral, corruption and brutality within the army and the downside of the vast geography of Russia.
How far do you agree that Lenin's leadership was the main reason why the Bolsheviks were able to seize power in October 1917? Lenin’s leadership was the main reason why the Bolsheviks were able to seize power in October 1917. Despite other contextual factors like the war and land contributing to the weakness of the Provisional Government, Lenin was still the main reason they were able to seize power, because without Lenin the Bolshevik party didn’t have any armed revolution on their agenda, they had even considered joining the Provisional Government like the Mensheviks and Social Revolutionists. Lenin was an extremely important individual in the seizure of the October Revolution. The leadership of the Bolshevik party, after Lenin had been forced into exile in Switzerland, didn’t press for an armed uprising.
When the Bolsheviks gained power in 1917, Lenin played a large part in their success, however there are many other factors which also played a large part in their success, for example the weaknesses in the Provisional Government, their lack of opposition, the strength and appeal of the Bolsheviks themselves, and many other factors. To begin with, The Provisional Government itself was a weak leadership, and had many problems which meant that when the Bolsheviks came to take power in October 1917, nobody opposed. To start with their large list of problems, the Provisional Government was not an elected body- this mean that they did not have the support of their people and because of the lack of loyalty, it meant that when the Bolsheviks came to seize power in 1917, it was infinitely more easier as the people were not prepared to defend it. The Provisional Government did not have control of the army due to Order Number 1 which gave control of the army to the Soviets, who therefore held all the power, as the Provisional Government had no army to uphold their regime. However one of the Provisional Government’s greatest faults was that they did not pull Russia out of the war, which was the cause of many of the country’s problems, the Bolsheviks however used this as leverage in gaining support and promised people that they would pull Russia out of war if they were in power, this gained them obvious support.
The personalities influenced the cold war, despite not being as significant as the other factors. Stalin being manipulative and ruthless instantly suggesting that relations with other countries, so different from his and he was very cautious of this. Source 8 suggests his personality, ‘threw Stalin back into neurotic solitude’ after the A bomb of 1945. Also after the death of Roosevelt which was Stalins ‘dream partner’ there was no need ‘to forge a strong relationship’ between the new politicians. When it