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

How was Stalin able to defeat both his left and right opponents?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How was Stalin able to defeat both his left and right opponents? There were many combining factors that enabled Josef Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili, better known as Josef Stalin, to so easily slip into the role of successor to Lenin. His path the leadership of the Communist party of the Soviet Union,(the CPSU) can be attributed to many factors and certainly cannot be put down to inevitable occurrence as Stalin was by no means the natural choice for leader following the death of Lenin in 1924 especially as the deceased leader's testament had branded Stalin "too rude." In 1903 Lenin created the Bolshevik party, and successfully led it through three revolutions to the helm of government, and headed the world's first socialist state. His authority was recognised within the party and he was a respected leader. By 1918 a civil war broke out dividing the county. Lenin foresaw that a united Bolshevik front against the bourgeoisie (the whites) was a necessity and also that the government (SOVNARKOM) would be the dominant force in the new civil state following the cessation of the civil war. Thus in the same year all other political parties were banned and thus the CSPU remained the only party from which SOVNARKOM ministers could be drawn from. ...read more.

Middle

Lenin in fact described him as "The most valuable member of the party" in his testament, although he stated his views contained too much enthusiasm for peasant profits and capitalism also. This was seen as un-Marxist, and he was forced to withdraw an article, which declared that the peasants should "Enrich yourselves". Bukharin had been very close friends with Stalin, and didn't expect him to reverse his support for N.E.P in 1928. Bukharin therefore, I believe, was an easier opponent for Stalin when he decided to introduce his Five Year Plan and Collectivisation of Agriculture in 1928-33, and Stalin's defeat of the right was made easier because of Bukharin's lack of power base within the party as Stalin, since being General Secretary, had created a firm one for himself. Bukharin was never the opponent the Trotsky was as he failed to come up with a successful plan to counter the arguments of super-industrialises. As a result he never really proved his abilities to his colleagues. Two politburo members who Stalin used as 'rightist allies' to block Trotsky were Kamenev and Zinoviev. They both initially supported N.E.P and attacked Trotsky's views. ...read more.

Conclusion

Stalin also held the power to the party and thus the right never were given a free hearing just as Stalin's enemies were not when he was party secretary. Trade Unions were the only hope of Stalin's oppositions yet Stalin still acted decisively against them. He sent the ruthless Politburo member Kaganovich, to undertake a purge against the suspect Trade Unionists. He also sent Molotov to carry out similar actions against the Moscow CPSU using loyal Party officials within its structure. As a result of this, by early 1929, Tomsky was no longer Trade Union Leader, Uglanov had been replaced in Moscow, Rykov had been superseded as premier by Molotov and Bukharin had been voted out as chairman of the Commintern and lost his place in the Politburo. They were in effect "dropping like flies" and Stalin wasn't having to work too hard for power. The gulf was never that wide between the left and right but Stalin exploited what little gap there was well. Overall I feel that none of Stalin's opposition from the left or the right had the confidence or the conviction to actually seriously challenge Stalin for the right to become Bolshevik leader, and as MaCauley states: "Stalin was greatly assisted by the inept tactics of his opponents." ...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. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1936 and 1939 rested on his remarkable tactical skills ...

    The meeting was held at Munich, between Hitler, Daladier, Chamberlain and Mussolini, where it was agreed that Germany military occupation of the Sudetenland would be phased over 1st-10th October. The Czechs were told to accept these agreements or fight alone.

  2. Why did the Franco-Prussian war happen and why were the Prussians able to defeat ...

    therefore relations between France and Prussia had deteriorated and therefore made the Spanish Succession Crisis more of danger because there was no love loss between France and Prussia by 1869. Bismarck's aims for southern Germany is also a cause of the Franco-Prussian war because Bismarck aimed to incorporate the Southern

  1. Napoleon Bonaparte.

    he has many other accomplishments that make him a great leader of the ancient world. He also was responsible for making France's economy prosper again after the revolution, and he was able to create the Code Napoleon that changed the entire justice system in his country.

  2. Lenin and the Bolshevik revolution.

    As the revolutions have progressed, the size, membership and consistency of these various blocs have oscillated considerably. The order of precedence of individuals within these blocs has not always been the same as within the pre-revolutionary radical groups from which they tend to draw their membership.

  1. War communism and NEP

    NEP NEP was an economy measure that moved away from the tight control of the state by the government during War Communism. In agriculture, there would be an end to requisitioning, to be replaced by a system of taxation that meant they could sell any spare food on the market for a profit.

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

    2,000 1935 193,000 108,900 267,000 1,200 1936 131,100 91,100 274,600 1,100 1937 936,700 779,000 790,600 353,000 1938 638,500 593,300 554,200 328,600 Total for 1937-8 1,575,200 1,372,300 1,344,800 681,600 (Figures in this table not exact, in 100s to make it easier to remember)

  1. Why was Stalin able to come to power by 1929?

    They spread rumours about the opposition and also gained control of the Politburo and Central Committee. A second pivotal factor to why Stalin was able to come to power in Russia by 1929 was simply down to his political skill.

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

    A field in which Stalin seemed a bit interested was in the leisure activity. Sport and fitness were encouraged to improve the general health of men and women. Trade unions and collective farms played a big role in providing clubs,sports facilities, film shows, festivals and general entertainment.

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