On 24th October 1917, the Bolshevik’s Red Army led a communist revolution against the Provisional Government by seizing control of stations, telephone exchanges, post offices, the national bank and the Winter Palace in Petrograd. By the beginning of November, Moscow and the Kremlin had fallen to the Bolsheviks. Lenin now had the chance to make Russia a communist country.
Before April 1917, Lenin was in exile in Serbia this meant that his influence was not as powerful as if he was in Russia, this meant that the party was not what Lenin wanted exactly and therefore did not do things he wanted done. Also, during the Summer/ Autumn of 1917 Lenin was again in hiding this meant that his orders were not as forceful as could have been and that the revolution did not happen as quickly as he wanted.
The working class were extremely enthusiastic about the opportunity to decrease hours, increse pay and the standard of working conditions. For this reason the working class were happy to self-sacrifice in order for the Bolsheviks to be built up and the overthrow the government. This was important as it gave the Bolshevik party mass support, a class to aim at but also use, for fighting if neccesary, to get what they wanted.
Gregory Zinoviev, another Bolshevik leader helped with the 1905 revolution by joining in the organisation of it. Zinoviev worked with Lenin and Kamenev while in exile to produce many propaganda magazines and pamplets.Lev Kamenev toured Russia making many propaganda speeches, he was also responsible for the railway strike in St.Petersberg during the 1905 revolution. He also revealed the lack of power the Duma possesed. Both he and Zinoviev firstly oppossed the idea of an October revolution but soon agreed to it. Both Kamenev and Zinoviev were in exile so like Lenin were unable to do as much as they wanted to.However Alexander Shlyapnikov, was not in exile during the post-October revolution. Previously he had organised the Bloody Sunday during the 1905 revolution. He helped undermine the government and represented the metal workers’ organisation.Vyacheslav Molotov was also not in exile during the October revolution. He edited and organised the Bolsheviks paper and propaganda. He worked closely with and together they helped organize the strikes that resulted in the . Molotov also became a member of the Military Revolutionary Committee that planned the .
Russia was a country of classes, within the classes were tight bonds’ but between the classes was harsh conflict. As the Bolsheviks appealed to two classes the peasants and the workers they had an advantage over other groups which only had the support of one group. Aslo, they could use the anger created by friction between classes to get them to fight another class, for example the upper class.
The Tsar would not abdicate this meant that when the war was failing people got extremely angry with him. Strikes began to break out and the Duma suggested that he should step down. The Tsar was ignoring the Duma's advice regarding Russia's demand for a change in government so consequently more strikes broke out. The Russians blamed the Tsar and did not support him anymore, which contributed to the Tsars abdication from the throne in 1917. By 1917, the consequences of the First World War had greatened. This meant that Russians were even more fed up of the Tsar, for whom they blamed.
While the Bolsheviks were organised (not very well) other parties were not organised at all, this meant they could not tell how much support they had or whether it would be a good idea to have a rally or not. This allowed the Bolsheviks to take advantage and use their organisational skills to get the support for a revolution.
In conclusion, I could say that while Lenin’s contribution was necessary and important, it was also sometimes not listened to and outvoted because of his exile. Therefore he did not always get his way and thus the party was not exactly perfect. If Lenin had not been in exile things may have been different, for example he may have persuaded his supporters to hold the revolution early, if this had happened it may not have worked and therefor a communist nation may never have come.
b) Explain Why Lenin and the Bolsheviks Replaced the Provisional Government as Leaders of Russia By November 1917.
The provisional government had dealed with the issues of war and land very ineffectively, which helped The Bolsheviks greatly in seizing power. They would not give the peasants the land which they had wanted, and expected when the Tsar was overthrown. War continued, despite the majority of Russia wanting it to end. Food and fuel shortages continued, and although no-one wanted to surrender to Germany, most people felt that it was time to give in, and give up. However, the provisional government wanted to keep the allies, and not break away before the war had ended; this showed peasants that the Provisional government were not considering the state of the country, or the conditions of the peasants, and that they did not care. John Reed, an American journalist described the situation in Petrograd in 'Ten days that shook the world':
"Week by week,food became scarcer.The daily allowance of bread
fell... Towards the end there was a whole week without bread at all.
Sugar one was entitled to at the rate of two pounds per month - if
one could get it at all, which was seldom... There was milk for half
the babies in the city; most hotels and private houses never saw
it for months. For milk and tobacco one had to stand in a queue
long hours in the chill rain"
Peasants wanted land, food, and peace, exactly what the Bolsheviks had been promising to bring them. This put the Bolsheviks in a good position to get a lot more support.
The Russian army had suffered from shortages, many were dying, and many Russians had lost family to the war already. Many units were ready to back the Bolsheviks, and the Military Revolutionary Comittee would help to co - ordinate troops and organise a revolution. Even the units that disapproved would not act against the soviets.
Alexander Kerensky became Prime Minister of the provisional government, and was at once faced with a challenge, as the commander - in - chief of the armies, General Kornilov planned to get rid of the Petrograd Soviet, and take control of the provisional government. Kornilov's rebel troops were some of the best in Russia, and as Kerensky had few loyal troops to defend him, it seemed that Kornilov's revolt would easily succeed. However, Kerensky decided to allow the Bolsheviks to set up a defence force, called to Red Gaurds, to help defend his position, the provisional government, and the Petrograd Soviet. The Bolsheviks came out of the Kornilov Revolt as heros. They had saved the provisional government, proving that they were not German agents. The Bolsheviks also came out of it as an armed and disciplined fighting force.
The Kornliov Revolt had been helped the Bolsheviks gain followers, and support.They had proven that they were loyal to Russia, and could be trusted, also that they were strong, as the provisional government had needed their help. The Bolshevik's position was strengthened even further as they received a majority vote in elections for the soviets of Moscow and other big cities. This is proof that more people were now supporting the Bolsheviks, this put them in a good position, and by October 1917 they were ready to consider carrying out a second revolution, and seize power, due to the events of the past months, the struggling provisional government, and the growing popularity for the Bolsheviks, this time the chances of success looked good.
In conclusion, I think that the reasons why Lenin and the Bolsheviks replaced the provisional government as leaders of Russia in November 1917 are: The provisional government were weak, and making the wrong decisions. The Bolsheviks and Lenin had always planned on starting a revolution and the time was right in November 1917, as has been explained. The Kornilov revolt helped the Bolsheviks gain a lot of power and trust. Rations were getting worse, and the war needed to end. All these are important reasons as to why Lenin and the Bolsheviks replaced the Provisional Government in November 1917. It was what the peasants, the workers, the army and the Bolsheviks were ready for, and the government were not ready to resist them.
c) The Following Were Equally Important Reasons Why Lenin and the Bolsheviks were Able to Hold on to Power During the Civil War:
Trotsky’s Organisation of the Red Army
The Disunity of the White Opposition
War Communism
The Leadership Qualities of Lenin.
Explain how far you agree with this statement.
The four reasons why Lenin and the Bolsheviks were able to hold onto power during the Civil war are all relevant and important reasons, I am going to look into whether or not they are all as important as each other.
Leon Trotsky was a superb leader, who built up the red army from next to nothing. He introduced conscription, for men over eighteen years old. Trotsky bought in around 50,000 former Tsarist officers with experience, and he appointed political Commissars (fanatical bolsheviks) to each unit, to make sure that orders were carried out. As well as introducing new methods and orders, he had experience in armies, and was very courageous - exactly the type of leader that was needed for a Red Army victory.
The order which Trotsky issued to the Red Army during the Civil War:
'I give warning that if any unit retreats without orders, the first to be shot down will be the commissary of the unit, and next the commander. Brave and gallant soldiers will be appointed in their places. Cowards, dastards and traitors will not escape the bullet. This I solemnly promise in the presence of the entire Red Army.'
This shows the lengths which Trotsky was prepared to go to, to achieve a victory for the red army. He was ruthless, and knew that he needed to be, to achieve a victory for the Red Army, the Bolsheviks, and the second revolution.
I think that, based on what I know about Trotsky, and his leadership skills, he was an excellent, and very powerful leader, and that his organisation of the Red Army is a very important reason as to why the Bolsheviks were able to hold onto power during the Civil war.
The White army lacked good leaders, commanders were often cruel, white generals did not trust each other, and there was much fighting and and arguing because groups had different aims or beliefs.
Some groups wanted the Tsar back, while some wanted a revolutionary change, some wanted a military dictator, others wanted a constitutional government. The only aim which they all had in common was that they wanted to see the Bolsheviks defeated. White generals would not trust each other, meaning that they would not co-ordinate their attacks, which was hard anyway as their armies were so scattered, and communication difficult. This was an advantage to the Red Army, who could easily then defeat White armies individually, one by one.
The Whites did appear to have the advantage of support from foreign powers: Britain, France, Japan, the USA, and several other countries. Their governments did not want to see Bolshevism spread into Europe, and their own countries. This gave the Whites supplies and armaments, although these were very valuable, the troops did not fight, tired of war, and some sympathetic to the Bolsheviks cause. Infact, the intervention of other countries helped the communists. They portrayed themselves as the defenders of the normal Russian people from foreign invaders, while the Whites were being used by capitalist powers. So even what could have been an advantage for the White Army turned out to be a help to the Reds.
Whilst Lenin had helped a lot during the time when the Bolsheviks were trying to gain power and support, I do not think that his role was as much of a success during the Civil war. Lenin's job was now to run the government, organising food and industrial production. This was not an easy job. there had been food riots, and industry was collapsing as starving workers left the cities. But it was still crucial to keep the Red Army well supplied. To achieve this, Lenin introduced the policy of 'War Communism'.
In towns the state took control of industry, the factories were told what to produce. Lenin put in his own managers, who imposed strict discipline on the workers. Food was rationed but only those working could get ration cards, and factory workers and soldiers were given larger rations, this was a good strategy by Lenin, as it encouraged people to join the Red Army, or work in factories to help keep the army well supplied. However, people did get annoyed by the way that things were being run. One report said that: 'One might have thought that these were not factories but the forced labour prisons of the Tsarist times.'
Peasants had expected life to be better after the Bolsheviks took power, however Lenin was making things worse for them, in peasants and workers eyes. The message which was given to them by Lenin and the Communists was that for a Red Army victory, first everyone had to suffer, then life would be a lot better.
In the country things were no better, food was already scarce, and Lenin desperately needed food for the workers. Since peasants were unwilling to sell their grain for money, which was becoming increasingly worthless, Lenin sent units of Cheka to seize food. People found hoarding food supplies were punished harshly, peasants resisted, many deciding to produce less grin, because they assumed it would just be taken away. The struggle became bitter, and the situation worsened. Lenin was losing himself and the Red Army support. Many peasants, as well as workers, began to think that the workers' state was worse than the government of the Tsar, which they had been so keen to be rid of. According to an internet source 'Lenin's policy of War Communism during the Civil War created social distress and led to riots, strikes and demonstrations.' I think that this statement has a lot of truth in it, and that whilst Lenin was a good leader for the Bolsheviks before they took control, his ideas about how to run the government, and deal with workers and peasants were inapropriate, and other methods would have been more successful, and of help to the Bolsheviks. Lenin's leadership qualities were of not great help here, and War Communism was no success at all. Fanya Kaplan who shot Lenin at the end of August in 1918, made a statement to the Cheka, describing Lenin as a "traitor to the revolution"
I have come to the conclusion, after analysing the four reasons given why Lenin and the Bolsheviks were able to hold on to power during the civil war, that they are not all equally as important. Overall I think that Trotsky's organisation of the Red army, and the dissunity of the White opposition are more important reasons than War Communism and the Leadership qualities of Lenin.
Trotsky's organisation of the Red Army is a very important reason as to why Lenin and the Bolsheviks were able to hold onto power, as he built the Red Army up, almost from scratch, he introduced conscription, and I think that he was a great asset to the Communists, and the Red Army. The disunity of the White opposition is another important reason as to why Lenin and the Bosheviks were able to hold onto power; I think that if they had been more organised, with better leaders, and less disunity, a victory for the White Army would have been possible. War Communism was a failure, peasants resisted, the economy was close to collapsing, and food shortages only worsened. Whilst Lenin may have been a good leader in the past I do not think that his leadership qualities were a help to the Red Army, as he spent most of his time organising War Communism, which led to peasant uprisings, and was no success.
