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

How significant were the personalities of the contenders to succeed Lenin in accounting for Stalins defeat of his opponents in the years 1924-1929

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Josh Chambers Y39 How significant were the personalities of the contenders to succeed Lenin in accounting for Stalin?s defeat of his opponents in the years 1924-1929 Stalin, throughout the fierce fight for power exploited his attributes to the best of his ability, however his tactics were not the only factor in his eventual success. Perhaps what?s more interesting is the systematic fails, one by one of all of his contenders ? which was due to their individual personalities. Many argue this is the more significant reason for Stalin?s rise to power, and that if this had have been changed Stalin?s success would have been entirely different. Stalin?s opponents, understandably had very different personalities. However looking in hindsight none of them seem to create a difficult situation for Stalin. This could be due to Stalin?s natural ability to change and use his opponents strengths and weaknesses, or perhaps the general naivety of many in the politburo. One main example of this is Trotsky, and his rather egotistic and arrogant personality. This intern made people weary of his power, and made him completely oversee Stalin as a contender for power. Lenin in his testament says himself he is ?not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution? and the politburo completely over saw this cautious remark for their own reputation. The evidence seems to suggest members of the Bolshevik party didn?t use their personality?s to the best if their potential. ...read more.

Middle

Furthermore his ability to switch ideologies and allies is a testament to his versatile personality. An example of this is in the later stages of the struggle, when only him and Bukharin were left for the job. Stalin suddenly rejected NEP because it was failing and turned radically left. This sudden maneuver allowed left wing supporters and nationalist war communists to support him, as well as gaining the support of anti NEP politicians. In all this he managed to leave Bukharin to pick up the pieces of NEP. Furthermore Stalin re introduced grain requisitioning in early 1928 to make sure NEP was a complete fail. Its these quite brilliant tactics that formulate into a plan that make Stalin truly versatile and incredibly shrewd and devious. In everything Stalin did there always seemed to be a very formulated plan, and in this was surrounded by brilliant political tactics. However these tactics were merely ways of getting rid of political opponents, and due to personalities as whole, arguably tactics are not as important as other factors. Alternatively the power bases? of other opponents could be as significant as personality in the war struggle for power, and the defeat of all his opponents. All Stalin?s opponents had important roles within the Bolshevik party, and in many ways ? more significant roles than Stalin. One in particular is Trotsky. ...read more.

Conclusion

On one hand it seems Stalin?s powerbase seems to be the primary factor, that despite anyone?s efforts his place within government allowed to build a vast fan base in such a short amount of time. Furthermore others power base didn?t seem to match the superiority of his, even though on the forefront they seem more important, Trotsky is a prime example of this. On the other hand his tactics seem the obvious significant factor ? looking at how he manipulated allies and oppositions, such as Bukharin and Zinoviev. More over his ability to control the politburo with his allies over the testament suggests that this could have been a primary turning point for Stalin?s direction on how to achieve power. However diving into the muddle of linked causes, personalities seems to come out on top. The tactics and moral high ground was generally taken by his opposition, but it seems they didn?t play hard enough. They didn?t morally want to use underhand tactics and switch ideologies ? because they believed in what they were fighting in. It?s this decorum that contributed more than anything else. Looking at the other side of the spectrum Stalin?s fierce personality, with no conscience seems to be the perfect mix to manipulate not only the communist party ? but the general public as well. It is this sheer inhumane ability to be deceptive in this way that allows the evidence to suggest, on the top, personality is the most significant factor in accounting for Stalin?s defeat of his opponents 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. To What Extent was Stalin's Personal Paranoia the Main Reason for the Purges?

    not level and that his attitude towards other human beings was one of huge indifference. After his second wife, Ekaterina Svanidze died he was believed to have said 'This creature softened my stony heart. She is dead and with her died my last warm feeling for all human beings.'26 Not

  2. Compare the Characters and beliefs of Lenin and Stalin

    Stalin's leadership also effected the life for the social elite, peasants and ethnic minorities. The social elite had a higher standard of living than other groups, they learnt more and had special shops and holidays. Ethnic leaders were persecuted in purges, Stalin undermined the national groups, he was suspicious of

  1. Mussolini(TM)s rise to power up to 1922 owes more to the failures of others ...

    Mussolini did not seize power nor did he need to use force, he gained power merely by threatening to use violence. I do not believe that at this stage Mussolini was unbeatable and had the leading figures stood up to him I believe that Mussolini may never have come to power.

  2. Who Was More Important - Lenin Or Stalin?

    said "...I am not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution."

  1. Building Stalin's Cult of Personality: The Role of Propaganda

    Among factories, farms and all of the public places appeared vociferous posters in infinite varieties and quantities ("Revolution by Design"). As Gustav Klutsis said: "the country was on the attack!" to fulfill the new plan, to exceed the quotas in any possible way, to secure the USSR ("The Struggle for Succession").

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

    he strategically harnessed the significance of these positions in order to control the party which contributed to his success. None of his rivals had a powerbase similar to his, and so whatever the ability of his rivals, he could always outvote and outmanoeuvre them regardless of talent.

  1. How significant was Lenin between the years 1902-1918 to the formation of the Bolshevik ...

    million in 1897.8 Lenin?s trained party activists, or ?professional revolutionaries?9, would therefore undertake the planning of the revolution and then, when the timing was right, prompt the proletariat into action before the other parties could act. Marx seemed to offer his support for this party policy in The Communist Manifesto

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

    They wanted a more rapid transition from the NEP to a Socialist State, needing rapid industrialisation. 5. 1926: The Left Opposition failed to get its policies through at the 15th Party Congress ? marked the start of their decline. They could no longer voice their opinions publically.

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