Not only this but Stalin used Lenin’s Legacy when he once again falsely claimed he was there at the beginning of the original Russian Revolution, when he was actually in exile. There is a picture, taken from the Eighth Bolshevik Party Congress in 1919 in which Trotsky was absent and Stalin took the opportunity to sit himself at Lenin’s right hand side, gaining him credit and showing his subtle ways of propaganda. However, Stalin’s win couldn’t just be down to what Lenin had done previous to the power struggle. To achieve and successfully get away with all of the above he would have had to have great skill as a politician – which he did. He had the ability to control Lenin’s funeral and turn it into his own campaign,
The main reasons for why the Reds won the Civil War the geographical factors affecting the war, support for the Bolsheviks and the Red Army and crucially were the leadership of Trotsky. The first reason why the Reds were able to win the Russian Civil War was down to the superior leadership skills of Trotsky compared to the Whites. Using strategic propaganda tactics and superb military leadership, he commanded the Red Army into victory. The first reason why the Reds had such a better leader was the way he chose and commanded his army. This was firstly by very strict military discipline.
Assess the reasons for the Bolshevik victory in the Russian civil war Bolshevik victory in the Russian Civil War of 1918 -1920 would not have been certain without the strong, determined and intelligent leadership provided by Trotsky and Lenin. The fact that the Bolsheviks were led by two individuals, who combined had tremendous political, social and military skills had a direct result on the outcome of the war. There were other significant contributing factors that led to the Bolshevik victory, in particular their supreme political policies that completely offered the Russian people what they wanted. For me the main reason why the Bolsheviks did so well and won was due to the Whites were incompetent, disorganised and highly inefficient. The success of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Civil War was due to Lenin, Trotsky and their combined political, social and military capabilities as they were experts.
How Far Has The Importance Of Trotsky In Creating Political Change In Russia Been Exaggerated? I believe that the importance of Trotsky has not been exaggerated; to the contrary, I believe it to be understated. This is due heavily to his role within the Bolshevik party, and its subsequent Stalinist interpretation. One of the key reasons for many doubting the significance of Trotsky’s role, is due to him only joining the Bolshevik party (arguably the most significant party in creating political change), in 1917. Until that point, he had been a Menshevik, and although both parties were socialist, they differed largely in their views of how power should be achieved.
One of the greatest ideas introduced was the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk which effectively ended World War One for Russia. Adam Ulam said “this was the legacy of years of isolation and defiance.” Despite these being opposed to their general ideology specifically to appeal to the masses and generate public support before the introduction of NEP. War communism was an important event that leads to the consolidation of Bolshevik power. Once civil war broke out, the Bolsheviks regime was in a dire situation by the
Source B lists a range of qualities that would be considered flattering such as ‘knowledge’ and ‘intelligence.’ Also it states that Stalin is ‘extraordinarily like Lenin.’ By comparing Stalin to Lenin – a man who was seen as ‘god like’ and was a great revolutionary hero, it suggests that influence Stalin had on people. On the other hand, Source A describes Stalin as ‘rude’, suggests that Stalin already has ‘boundless power’, and would abuse that power. These attributes are displayed very clearly through a number of events such as Stalin’s ‘rudeness’ toward to Lenin’s wife Krupskaya, as well as his comrades. Also his ‘boundless power’ was shown through his position as General Secretary. A position, thrust upon him by committee, and meant he was in control of the ‘party machine’ and therefore able to choose who was allowed into the Bolsheviks ranks, thus ensuring he has political backing and therefore could always ‘deliver the votes,’ as people were aware of the privileges he had given them.
The time was right to take control and replace the temporary body with Lenin’s communist regime, based upon the theories of Karl Marx. Without Lenin, this revolution would have barely taken off the ground. His ideology is undoubtedly the theory behind the revolution of the people, but perhaps it is unfair to say that Lenin was fully responsible for the successful outcome - there are others who can claim a part in this Revolution. Predominantly Trotsky, who was a “fiery orator and revolutionary leader” , led the revolution and action on the ground, also he later implemented the Provisional Government in trying to attack the Soviet bodies, giving the Bolsheviks a reason for taking control. The October revolution was an uprising against the Provisional Government led by the Bolsheviks, however there is much debate surrounding who actually commanded the revolution - was it Lenin’s theory or Trotsky’s actions that led to the Bolsheviks success in October?
Whilst many historians argue this line, it would be detrimental to assess only this view. Rather as stated by Bruce Dennit at his HTA speeches at Sydney Uni in 2013, “Russia was not a superpower, it did not have the same capacity as the US”. Therefore it is difficult to say that the Cold war originated based on this argument alone, rather it originated because of a clash of ideology, that is the US had capitalism, whilst the USSR had communism. They were fundamentally apart and it is this reason that the cold war originated. This clear clash in ideology is prevalent in many events throughout this time period, such as the post war conferences in Yalta and Potsdam, The Truman doctrine, signifying Americas change in foreign policy, the Berlin Blockade and airlift, and the Korean War.
Lenin’s contribution to the Bolshevik Party was an essential factor in their consolidation of power during 1917-1924, however; Lenin’s role was not the only factor contributing to their success. The Bolsheviks were regarded as a “minor feature of Russian political life” and it was not until Lenin’s return to Russia that the party became a key player. It can be seen that Lenin played a pivotal role in the consolidation of power due to his background which allowed Lenin to be influenced by a revolutionary upbringing. Through his upbringing, Lenin was able to develop a strong leadership, political insight and determination allowing the Bolsheviks to be lead into power. Whilst the Bolsheviks were in power, Lenin’s role in dealing with uprisings and anti-communist groups was significant as it allowed the Bolsheviks to remain in power.
In the era of the World War I, for the deemed aggressor to take responsibility was not an unfair or preposterous idea. The “loser(s)” of a war had to admit full responsibility for their actions, and accept harsh reparations. Just a year ago, in 1918, Germany itself had imposed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk upon the new Bolshevik government of Russia. It is arguable that the Brest-Litovsk Treaty contained much harsher terms than those of the Treaty of Versailles; Russia was forced to give up Estonia, Riga, Lithuania, Livonia, and some of White Russia. The loss of these lands was particularly daunting for Russia since they were of great economic importance.