[4] Peter's frequent travels left Russia unmanned, often for months at a time. His absence often spawned revolts and rebellions among the people. [5] When Peter returned he showed no mercy in putting down the rebellions and asserting his absolute power over the country. This is when Peter's true cruelty was shown, his brutality in sentencing those who rebelled brought out a different man, a man who loved to see people suffer, a man we would see more often as his reign progressed. People who expressed negative thoughts about Peter's decisions were often executed before they had a chance to gain followers and rebel against the Tsar.
Joseph Stalin truly strengthened this nation to become a widely known superpower, although he carried out mass genocide and created a murderous dictatorship. Historians have viewed him in many different ways, including a psychotic power-driven killer, a military and communist genius, and also the man who transformed the Soviet Union into an industrial colossus. Joseph Stalin should have never taken the role of the USSR’s leader. Instead, Trotsky should have been the one to take Lenin’s place, which would have saved the lives of millions. Joseph Stalin put forth many positive attributes to the USSR, however; the only reason this was possible was through his brutal intimidation tactics used on the nation’s
The party had vastly increased in size due to the quarter of a million or so brought in under the Lenin Enrolment and Stalin had been able to indoctrinate many of these – often poorly educated and politically naïve – into following the nascent cult of Stalin. In addition, ‘Comrade Card Index’ knew the strengths and weaknesses of those around him and did not hesitate to stoop to underhand methods to get his way. Dzerzhinsky, the head of the secret police, reported to Stalin, and the faintly veiled menace Stalin possessed as the spider at the centre of the web certainly added to his power. All these factors meant that the General Secretariat was, despite appearances, very
How important was Stalin’s use of the Lenin legacy in gaining power? Stalin’s use of the Lenin Legacy helped him gain support during the years 1924-1929, eventually resulting in him winning the power struggle and gaining power in Russia. Even though in Lenin’s final testament he made it clear that Stalin was trouble and he should be got rid of, Stalin’s political cunning and his use of the Lenin legacy meant that he was able to gain people’s support and become leader of the Communist party. One of the most noticeable was at Lenin’s funeral. Firstly, Stalin had told Trotsky (who was a major rival to Stalin at this time) the wrong date for Lenin’s funeral.
Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin were both powerful, ambitious leaders that worked their way into positions of power. Stalin took over after Lenin died to lead the USSR after the Russian Revolution. Hitler became leader of the Nazi Party and gained the people’s support with promises of a strong leader that resisted western powers. On their rise to power, both Stalin and Hitler became leaders of political parties, eliminated opposing parties, and promised a better future for the people and country, but Stalin used the people’s support as leverage in his power struggle with Trotsky while Hitler used his passion and the economic situation in Germany to become leader of the Nazi party and gain support over the socialists. Both Hitler and Stalin started their journey towards power by joining political parties.
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. Kamenev was viewed as an unambitious person and never made an effort to become leader of the Soviet Union, this really limited his chances of becoming leader. Bukharin was seen as an able competitor, honest and incorruptible. However his appeal was damaged by his open disagreements with Lenin, also he did not openly go against Stalin which led him to be manipulated by Stalin. Overall Stalin
To what extent was Lenin’s leadership the reason why Bolsheviks were able to consolidate their power between 1917-1924? By the early 1920's Russia was in the authoritarian grip of a one party dictatorship. The Communist Party as the Bolshevik's had become. It had a ruthless leadership which was ideologically motivated to hold on to power at any cost. This was a dramatic change from the Bolshevik party's position in 1917 when the party enjoyed widespread support amongst the peasants, workers and soldiers who saw in the Bolshevik's the best hope for popular revolution.
How far was Trotsky responsible for the communist victory during the civil war? Communists have won the civil war due to Trotsky’s leadership, making Trotsky the vital reason for communist success. However other factors like War Communism, Geographical advantage and failure of the White Army also contributed to Communist victory. Trotsky was the leader of the Red Army which he has founded in 1918. The army, by the end of the civil war, reached up to 5 million soldiers.
Stalin was successful as leader of the USSR between the years 1928 to 1953 to a large extent. On one hand his totalitarian regime enabled vast industrial growth; however his agricultural policies led to miserable conditions in rural areas. Overall one can state that Stalin’s economic system was well suited to the demands of total war. Stalin establishing a totalitarian government led to his success as leader of the USSR. He was supported by the public due to his ruthless and efficient regime during the 1930’s.
When his rivals were expelled from the Politburo, they were removed because the majority of the members voted for this. Therefore, Stalin’s action in order to gain power were quiet legal. After he was invited into the main committee of the Bolsheviks, he then gained other beneficial minority posts such as being an executive of the committee and becoming head of their party newspaper “Pravda”. Stalin, did not take part in any major roles during the October rising. During the civil war, he was consistent in disobeying orders made from Lenin and Trotsky, as they were the main organisers.