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

How significant was Lenin between the years 1902-1918 to the formation of the Bolshevik Government?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐By ?formation of the Bolshevik Government? (BG), we are referring to the October Revolution (OR) and lead up to it. Lenin?s significance throughout the timeframe, 1902-1918, to the formation of the BG has been characterised by theoretical and written works, outlining the Bolsheviks Party?s policy and methods, as well as impressive leadership in calling for, and achievement of, a socialist revolution. Yet, one must consider the influences and achievements of other individuals and factors; which undoubtedly aided the communists in their plight against the Provisional Government (PG). The adaptation of Marxism by Lenin to suit Russian circumstances, allowed him to apply Marxist principles to a social and economic context for which they had not been intended for. In Marxist theory, before a proletariat uprising could occur, first a Bourgeois Revolution (BR) must establish parliamentary democracy and full scale industrialisation, while removing feudalism and Absolute Monarchy. Russia, on the other hand, was still an autocratic, totalitarian, state with no civic freedoms; coupled with a feudal system: no revolution could happen until a BR was achieved. The Mensheviks wanted to have an alliance with the Liberals in order to bring about said revolution.1 Lenin refuted this idea, however, at the RSD?s Second Party Congress in 19032: his position being that the Liberals would make a deal with the monarchy. He laid out his views on Marxism in What Is To Be Done in 1902 ? ?adapting? the principle of revolution from below into revolution from above. In other words he advocated the recruiting of ?professional revolutionaries?3 ? who would form a ?Vanguard Party?4 ? reflecting the views of the workers, while at the same time excluding the ?organisation of workers?5 or trade unions from the political side of the struggle (see source 1). Conversely, Marx had in 1868 asserted that ?trade unions were the schools of socialism.?6 Lenin?s response was that the party should be comprised of purely professional full time activists, as they would have the experience and understanding to make it more difficult for the police to track them down; while the workers should participate in the economic struggle for higher wages. ...read more.

Middle

Lenin himself did not appear until the second session of the ARCS the next evening.33 Hence, Lenin needed Trotsky?s assistance in sanctioning a revolution and relied on him to exercise direct control over the operation details. Thus, Trotsky?s skill and leadership was significant to the formation of the BG. Overall, Lenin?s role in the formation of the BG from1902-1917 was of great significance. His reworking of Marxism so that it would hold relevance to the social and economic context of Russia in the early 20th century was his greatest achievement ? allowing the Bolshevik Marxists of his time to attain purpose as professional revolutionaries ? bringing about a communist revolution despite being in the midst of a bourgeoisie one. Lenin showed considerable political ability in appealing to the masses; his April Theses left the Bolsheviks as the only credible revolutionary party in the eyes of many ? thus gaining much needed support and increased membership. However, the role of other factors and individuals throughout the time period also assisted Lenin in his quest for communist dominance. The Kornilov coup, instead of crushing the Bolsheviks, actually strengthened them ? resulting in a better armed and led communist party. Additionally, Trotsky was a useful ally by Lenin?s side and certainly contributed to the formation of the BG: his help ensured the OR was brought forward and he had direct access to the planning and commencement of the hostilities. Although these other individuals and factors had a great significance on the revolution, it is imperative to remember that the original, keystone, idea of bring a communist revolution forward was Lenin?s. Bibliography Baggins, B., Ryan, S., Walters, D., Batur, S., Nehru, A., & Bismo, M. (2008). All-Russian Congress of the Soviet. Retrieved January 11, 2015, from The Encyclopedia of Marxism: https://www.marxists.org/glossary/events/a/arcs.htm#june-1917 Lenin, V. I. (1964). Collected Works June-September 1917 (Vol. 25). (S. Apresyan, & J. Riordan, Trans.) Moscow. ...read more.

Conclusion

The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p12. 8 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p1 (1897 census). 9 Marx, K. (1848). The Communist Manifesto. p24. 10 Marx, K. (1848). The Communist Manifesto. p24. 11 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p32. 12 Lenin, V. I. (1964). Collected Works June-September 1917 (Vol. 25). (S. Apresyan, & J. Riordan, Trans.) Moscow. p237. 13 Wood, A. (2003). The Origins of the Russian Revolution 1861-1917 (3rd ed.). p52. 14 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p35. 15 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p35. 16 Oxley, P. (2001). Russia - From Tsars to Commissars 1855-1991. p99. 17 Russia Today. (2011). Prominent Russians: Lavr Kornilov. Retrieved January 11, 2015, from Russiapedia: http://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-russians/military/lavr-kornilov/ 18 Russia Today. (2011). Prominent Russians: Lavr Kornilov. Retrieved January 11, 2015, from Russiapedia: http://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-russians/military/lavr-kornilov/ 19 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p39. 20 Oxley, P. (2001). Russia - From Tsars to Commissars 1855-1991. p99. 21 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p35. 22 Oxley, P. (2001). Russia - From Tsars to Commissars 1855-1991. p99. 23 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p35. 24 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p35. 25 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p38. 26 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p38. 27 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p38. 28 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p83. 29 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p83. 30 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p83. 31 Baggins, B., Ryan, S., Walters, D., Batur, S., Nehru, A., & Bismo, M. (2008). All-Russian Congress of the Soviet. Retrieved January 11, 2015, from The Encyclopedia of Marxism: https://www.marxists.org/glossary/events/a/arcs.htm#june-1917 32 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p39?. 33 Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution (2nd ed.). p41. --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ How significant was Lenin between the years 1902-1918 to the formation of the Bolshevik Government? 2 ...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. Lenin and the Bolshevik revolution.

    Politically, Vikzhel sought a stable environment in which it could maintain the privileged position which its members had gained after the February Revolution. While it mouthed the usual revolutionary epithets, Vikzhel did everything possible to maintain the status quo. One of the reasons why the Kornilov Revolt was derailed in

  2. Russia 1905-1941 'Explain how the unpopularity of the Provisional Government contributed to the Bolshevik ...

    Government's power and authority was severely tested and its unpopularity led to the recognition of the Bolshevik Party in Russian society. After another failed offensive against Austria in July 1917, a 100,000 soldiers and Bolsheviks roamed Petrograd chanting 'all power to the Soviets'.

  1. How significant a role did Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin play in the development of ...

    entirety but not retreat? ? he was able to take victory for the Reds. However other factors played a large part in why the Communists won; the Whites failed to win popular support, were divided not only geographically but also politically, and had severe supply shortages and a failed military strategy as their forces did not work together.

  2. Assess the view that the failures of the provisional government were the main factors ...

    rocket, so it was inevitable that Lenin and the Bolshevik?s would take over. Von Laue has the middle ground when compared with these two because Von Laue points out that the Bolshevik?s could not simply send a telegram to disband this government like the previous one had done, Von Laue

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

    Loyalty to the party and the state was promoted above the ideals of romantic love or loyalty to a husband or family. Women in the party: By 1928, only about 65,000 out of 1 million party members were women. Female membership of the Komsomol never rose above 20% in towns and 5% in the countryside.

  2. 'Stalin's leadership was the most significant reason for Soviet victory over Germany in the ...

    Because of the rapid industrialisation, the coal industry, for example, had unskilled and inexperienced workers and poor working conditions. Also there was a fall in productivity as one eighth of factories were moved to be secured. But many were too close.

  1. How far could the fall of the Tsars be considered the most significant turning ...

    This can be seen in Lenin?s dissolution of the Constituent Assembly after the Bolsheviks gained barely a quarter of the seats. This lack of modernisation can also be viewed socially because when Russia had limited economic resources in 1918, ?the government nationalized industry and subordinated it to central administrations in

  2. How significant was foreign influence in shaping Italian political and social development in the ...

    However, with the death of Gregory XVI in 1846, a seemingly much more liberal Pope Pius IX emerged. His election horrified Austria, a Catholic country, as a Pope that promoted liberalism could inspire revolutionaries to overthrow Austrian autocracy within Italy.

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