• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How far does Stalins position as General Secretary explain his success in defeating his rivals in the years 1924-1929?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How far does Stalin's position as General Secretary explain his success in defeating his rivals in the years 1924-1929? Following Lenin's death in 1924, the Communist leadership of Russia was thrown into disarray. Different ideas for the future of socialism were unveiled, and out of this ideological confusion, various contenders for the party emerged. Throughout the next five years, a turbulent period of struggle in the power vacuum between these contenders ensued, and Stalin eventually emerged as the successful new leader of the USSR. Stalin's position as General Secretary of the party, among other factors of which I shall explore, contributed to this appointment - a leader which would effectively go on to win WW2, whilst enforcing totalitarianism throughout Russia. Stalin's position of General Secretary allowed him to use and abuse Lenin's systems to get to the top. Stalin had the power to control what was discussed and how politburo decisions were to be carried out, and he had the significant influence of patronage. This allowed him to access every strand of the Communist party - the orgburo, politburo, and secretariat. His power of patronage allowed him to use his authority to place his most reliable supporters in key and enviable positions within the party. As a result, these people were extremely loyal to Stalin since they owed their place to him, and so therefore he could count on their support. These appointed people became known as 'Stalinist delegates' since at party congresses they could deliver the votes in Stalin's favour. ...read more.

Middle

Stalin suddenly went on to blast the NEP and favour rapid industrialisation and a force for the kulaks. To Trotsky, Bukharin's backing of the NEP suggested he was too capitalist and was neglecting the working class and undermining Communism. However, Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution also seemed too extreme. By Stalin differing his positions on the NEP through to the mid 1920s before deciding to rapidly industrialise at the end of the 1920s, he was supported by most of the party because he responded to the mood of the times and had loyal supporters. Stalin forced Bukharin to admit his political errors by accusing him of factionalism. This attacked Bukharin and his powerbase as party theorist and communications, which stopped not only Bukharin but also his allies Rykov and Tomsky. This resulted in a political structure which was entirely dominated by Stalinist delegates who ensured votes in Stalin's favour. Stalin's socialism in one country appealed to the nationalism of the party because it was focused on building a self sufficient Russia. Trotsky once said, 'the renovation of the party apparatus...must aim at replacing the mummified bureaucrats', suggesting that the party was becoming too bureaucratic and was losing the spirit of the revolution, and that it needed more democracy and openness. However, Stalin's political shrewdness and his strategic alliances resulted in him being the only credible person left to lead the Communist party, effectively having destroyed all other opponents. Another reason for the succession of Stalin to become Communist party leader is because he came out top when personal rivalries between the contenders occurred. ...read more.

Conclusion

He also had a revolutionary record and had Georgian proletarian roots, meaning he was not seen as a threat to cause splits in the party (unlike Trotsky). In conclusion, the 'grey blur' that was Stalin quietly defeated his major opponents and secured the leadership of the USSR until his death in 1953. He won the leadership struggle without the threat of gulags (political labour camps), imprisonment, or murder - his political prowess gained him victory among the other discussed factors. It would be ignorant to solely admire Stalin for his climb to power through his positions in the party such as General Secretary - he was helped along by luck - it was an advantageous time for Lenin to die. The weaknesses of opponents - Trotsky effectively led to his own demise. The help of early allies - Zinoviev and Kamenev were key to dismantling Trotsky. The ideological conflict - Stalin strategically shifted alliances to play off each contender with each other. The personal rivalries between contenders - Stalin's political cunningness undermined his opponents. The legacy Lenin left - Stalin was suited to bequeath the Russia he left behind. Lastly, the personal qualities of Stalin - he wasn't perceived as a threat until it was too late. However, his position as General Secretary was paramount to his rise despite these other factors, because it gave him the ability to appoint who he chose to the politburo and Sovnarkom. Without patronage, Stalin would have seriously struggled to gain the power of the USSR. His role as General Secretary ensured that Stalin could not be defeated politically in the struggle for power in the years 1924-1929. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Reasons for Napoleon's Success (to 1807).

    to keep Britain out of the Baltic. * Although the assassination of the Tsar in march 801 and Nelson's bombardment of Copenhagen the following month brought the League to a speedy end, the new Tsar, Alexander I, despite his anti-French sympathies, showed no signs of wishing to form an Anglo-Russian alliance.

  2. How successful were Stalin's economic policies?

    However there were not enough of these to have a significant impact and shortages of goods meant that the new facilities could do little good. In addition to this, international tension towards the end of the plans meant that resources were diverted towards heavy industry and armaments.

  1. Identified within this study is the argument that whilst many of Lenin's theories and ...

    As a commercial historian and head of History at a school, A.J. Lee does not have a historical agenda of his own (he takes into account all schools of thought in a critical manner) and therefore these figures are likely to be reliable.

  2. How far did the achievements of Stalin's economic modernisation programme justify the costs?

    start the largest sector of the economy which was agriculture and he wanted this to assist the five year plans by providing enough food to feed the workers and providing surplus to sell to buy modern equipment to industrialise. Many historians see collectivisation as the most extreme and rapid part of Stalin's modernisation programme.

  1. To What Extent was Stalin's Personal Paranoia the Main Reason for the Purges?

    All who were in some vague contact with foreigners must also have been deemed to be wrecking the economy somehow as the brother of the woman who supplied the German Consul's milk was arrested.13 There were many reasons that one was risking arrest and execution; being involved in economics was

  2. Leni Riefenstahl The Propagandist or Artist? A Historiographical Debate.

    Hitler attempted to intervene in the production of Triumph of the Will so that party officials could be included. This was an offence to Riefenstahl's artistic principles and she refused * Olympia- The film which most supports the argument of the artist theory is Olympia.

  1. The Impact of Stalins Leadership in the USSR, 1924 1941. Extensive notes

    Zinoviev?s strengths in the power struggle: 1. Regarded as intelligent, energetic and very knowledgeable. 2. One of the party?s best speakers. 3. An ?Old Bolshevik? ? meant he was likely to get respect from colleagues. 4. Promoted to the highest ranks of the party by Lenin. 5.

  2. Compare the characters and beliefs of Lenin and Stalin.

    Coming from Stalin this was a great success and improvement. 4: Who do you think was the more important figure in Russian history, Lenin or Stalin? Explain your answer. Before judging who had the better impact, if that means the most important, we have to make an overall view and

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work