In Stalin’s struggle to becoming leader of Russia he had many things to overcome. One of Stalin’s main threats was the left side of the party. Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev were the main threats from the lefts side of the party. So Stalin had to eliminate their threat quickly. One of the ways how Stalin defeated the left side of the party was to make an alliance with Bukharin.
Yet, popular support alone cannot bring military success nor can it bring stability. In the period leading up to, and during, the civil war the Red Army, under the guidance and influence of Leon Trotsky, were transformed from a ‘rabble to an incomparable fighting force’[2]. They were vast in number and located in Russia’s key industrial centers providing firm foundations from which they could build and also resist attack. The formidable pair of Lenin and Trotsky combined to create a party which boasted military might and also political and social awareness. Propaganda and foreign intervention helped to portray the Soviet leadership as ‘leaders of a national liberation struggle against foreign imperialists’[3] and this won them support from the masses whilst the Whites reliance on foreign aid rendered them vulnerable if such aid was to be withdrawn.
In 1924 Lenin dies leaving the role as leader of the communist open. Lenin did not want Stalin, but Trotsky to take over his position. But as Lenin’s strokes got worse, he lost the ability to participate in the CC (Central Committee). Lenin had information about Stalin that could have been very damaging if it was released in public. Stalin had many calculated methods to achieve the power of Russia.
However after Karakazov attempts to assassinate the Tsar in 1866, he becomes much more autocratic, revealing that he had no intention of significantly developing politics, his use of the Zemstvas were in fact to help sustain autocracy, through making local administration more efficient. It can be suggested from this that Alexander II had put the Zemstva Act in place to appease the nobles angered by the Emancipation Act. Alexander III was much more of a successful autocrat. His reactionary attitude led to the reversal of many of his father’s liberal reforms, and was in some cases angered by them. Alexander III re-implements Tsarist form, through the use of repression and terror.
One of the main reasons why Stalin emerged as sole leader was because of how he used pragmatism to manipulate Lenin’s opinion of him to suggest that he was the most favorable leader to carry on Marxism throughout Russia. This key event that secured Stalin’s public support was around the time of Lenin’s funeral. His role as general secretary gave him the ‘grey blur’ title because of his reputation of being invisible, focusing his time on important paperwork. When Lenin released his testament, Stalin used his reputation to change it, which had previously had influential and opinionated views on Stalin, and if seen by the public, would inevitably have changed the success of Stalin’s emergence to a failure at becoming leader. Lenin’s real opinion of Stalin was highly negative.
How accurate is it to say that the growth of reformist groups in the years from 1881 was the main cause of the 1905 Revolution? The 1905 Revolution was the start of political change in Russia, unlike other major European powers of the time, Russia was being ruled by an autocratic government and any effective reforms would have had to been by ‘change from above’. However, the Tsar Alexander III and his son, Nicholas II were firm conservatives and this ideal route would not have happened. Resentment to the lack of change created the growth of reformist governments and caused a Revolution which catalysed the much needed change in Russia. There were many factors that created a base for the reformist groups to flourish at that time in Russia which in turn created a Revolution.
Nicholas II attempted to rule Russia as an autocrat as he believed that autocracy was the only was to save Russia from anarchy. As historian Orland Figes noted, “instead of embracing reform, [Nicholas] adhered rigidly to his own archaic vision of autocracy.” He had ascended to the throne in 1894 after his father Alexander III died suddenly. He had not been prepared for life as a ruler as his father had not briefed him in matters of the state, believing Nicholas to be unintelligent and weak. And Alexander was probably right. Nicholas turned out to be inflexible in his views and politically naive.
To what extent did Alexander III measures create a stronger Russia? When Alexander III came into power as tsar Russia was in crisis after Alexander II was assassinated by the people will. Alexander III faced a hard job of keeping control of Russia and keeping supreme political power, this meant reform for Russia. Although he was reforming Russia like many Russians wanted to, he was actually moving backwards and launched Russia on the return to conservatism and brought an end to further political reform.Alexander III brought in new reforms to strengthen Russia after the tsar was assassinated because of Russia bad state, these reforms effected the political, financial and nearly every aspect of Russian society. One of the most radical and important changes the tsar first made was russification , this meant that in 1885 the official language was changed to Russia and was taught in all school and no other language was allowed to be used in school .
This ultimately marked the end of Nicholas’ unlimited power as an autocratic ruler and the beginning of a constitutional monarchy. The Manifesto would grant fundamental civil liberties to the people, and create a legislative body known as the Duma through which all laws must be approved by in order to be operative. However, due to the fact that the Duma was merely a consultative body, the people were not satisfied with the law. The Duma’s ultimately represented the mouthpiece of the Tsar’s opposition and the voice of the Russian people. The outbreak of World War One in 1914 also spelt disaster for the Tsar upon his decision to take direct command of the Russian army, which meant that every military failure would now be associated with him personally and contributed to the growing sense of dissent.
In many respects, there is no doubt that Alexander III was the most effective Tsar in such the short reign that he had. He was referred to as a reactionary, unlike his father Alexander II who was known as a reformer. He managed to please the people with his Russian figure and attitude, he changed their attitude and he made tsarism look all the better, all in a short period of time. Despite their different policies, they had the same ambitions inside their head in the long run, and that was to strengthen autocracy in the Russian empire but Alexander III did this by reversing what his father had done as he felt he knew better ways of dealing with the situation and strengthening the Tsarist position. The first thing that Alexander III did when he came into power to contradict his fathers’ reforms was to recall the decision of creating the constitution.