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

How far was Stalin's success due to his political ability as opposed to the weaknesses of his rivals?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Eva Frauke G�hring History Mrs Simpson How far was Stalin's success due to his political ability as opposed to the weaknesses of his rivals? Joseph Stalin, leader of communist Russia from 1928-1953, succeeded in his rise to power due to mainly two factors, his political ability, as well as the weaknesses of his rivals. However, most achievements Stalin did are due to his abilities and his skills to treat people and play them out against each other, but certainly also the mistakes made by his rivals play a big role. Without those his success wouldn't have been possible. After Lenin's death in 1924, the question of his succession was unsolved. In his testament he criticised each of his closest colleagues. Trotsky was most likely to be Lenin's successor, since he had been his right-hand and already played a big role in the first revolution, whereas Stalin only played a minor role. "Stalin on the other hand, was seen as an administrator and a rather dull personality." 1However, clear was that he wanted to be succeeded not by a single person, but a leadership by the politburo. A power struggle for Lenin's succession began. ...read more.

Middle

Many of the party members owed loyalty to him. When the party grew, new party members who were poorly educated and politically na�ve came in. These were easy to manipulate. Stalin, who had the same background as most of them, he was from a poor family, used this to make them identify with and therefore support him. When Stalin was about to change his opinion to whatever seemed best to be in a key position and not to lose support, he proved his political abilities and his skills to "play on the people's fears and emotions"5, once again. Initially Stalin was more for the right side and allied with Bukharin, Tomsky and Rykov. They were for NEP, or private ownership and for "socialism in one country" rather than the left, who were for a widespread revolution and against NEP. Trotsky then openly attacked the economic policies. This criticism was unpopular in the Party and the chance was there to accuse Trotsky of factionalism, which banned the formation of any factions in the party and ensured party solidarity. Stalin didn't hesitate and took the opportunity. After also having moved against Zinoviev and Kamenev, they and Trotsky formed the 'United Opposition' that again Stalin was able to defeat through his previous actions and abilities, their attempt to fight back was too late. ...read more.

Conclusion

He was almost seen as a danger to the revolution and "someone who might betray for his own ends."8 The next great mistake he made was not to take any opportunities to stop or weaken Stalin. He did not debate Stalin and didn't even try to compete. He never made an attempt to respond to criticism. Trotsky often did not attend to important party meetings, due to illnesses. He did little to built up support and therefore had no support were it counted. Another important point in Stalin's success that was due to his rival's weaknesses was that Lenin's Testament was not published. This could have cost Stalin his job. But Zinoviev etc. were more concerned about Trotsky and since the testament damaged them all they agreed not to publish it. Trotsky again did not speak. And Lenin's fears about Stalin weren't paid attention to. In conclusion, Stalin's abilities as well as the weaknesses of his rivals were important in the power struggle and Stalin's success. The Politburo underestimated him and allowed themselves to appear as the opposition. Therefore they were in danger of factionalism and could easily be played and voted out. Stalin managed to appear as a moderator between the Left and the Right and knew how to appeal to people and could therefore play them out against each other. ...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).

    a nevertheless a great general, quoting Wellington that he was 'a great homme de guerre, possibly the greatest who ever appeared at the head of a French army'. The point out thee extent of Napoleon's conquests achieved in so few years.

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

    * Her films have had an enormous impact on world cinema, and she has remained a controversial and unrepentant pariah. * Audrey Salkeld's Leni Riefenstahl: A Portrait (1997) states: 'How much being a woman, and how much her own personality contributed to her fate..........

  1. How far does Stalins position as General Secretary explain his success in defeating his ...

    To reduce Trotsky's influence (the main contender), Stalin formed a coalition with Zinoviev and Kamenev named the 'triumvirate', in 1923. This opposed the left opposition's struggle for power and highlighted key issues in the industrialisation debate and the future of revolution in Russia.

  2. The enormous role that Trotsky played in the success of the Bolsheviks up until ...

    won by the Red Army and was again solely down to Trotsky. In conclusion, although seen by some as not a true Bolshevik, due to his early alliance with the Mensheviks, Trotsky soon proved otherwise. Whilst Lenin was the dictator, Trotsky was his right hand man.

  1. Links between the two regimes of Lenin and Stalin.

    They class the period of Stalinism as "a struggle on the same scale"22as the First World War; "a war against the nation"23. Ulam considers collectivisation as a war against the peasantry- he asks, "Was the Civil War ever concluded?"24 For the totalitarian school of thought both Lenin and Stalin saw peasants as scum, malleable to any needs of the party.

  2. Dizzy with Success - lenin and stalin

    The unjust and brutal nature of the collectivisation only further exacerbated the situation. Peasants, seeing that many of their number were being deported and that much of their grain and property were being stolen, were obviously less inclined to join the collective farms, less inclined to work and more inclined to slaughter their animals and hinder production.

  1. Compare and contrast the economic policies of Lenin and Stalin and evaluate their success.

    In addition, most of the economy was taken over, on the behalf of the people, by the government. This represented a big step towards communism because the country was now in a period of socialism, a transitional phase between the end of capitalism and the beginning of communism.

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

    In a way we have enough information of who and what things they separately did wrong along their lives, as politicians and leaders of Russia. If more important means who had the better impact, it is to say that both Lenin and Stalin were prepared to see millions of Russians suffer and die for their ideals.

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