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

To what extent were the Stalinist purges simply a way of eliminating his rivals?

Extracts from this document...


To what extent were the Stalinist purges between 1928 and 1939 "simply to eliminate his rivals"? Between 1928 and 1939, millions people died as a result of the purges, a number that has been frequently debated and reconsidered, a crucial aspect being the huge difference between official figures and numbers put forward by historians such as Robert Conquest, who states that "the total number of deaths caused by the Soviet regime's terror can hardly be lower than 13 to 15 million"1. Restlessness in Russia had been rife for years, stemming back before the October Revolution and the end of Tsarist Russia, and when Stalin came to power in 1922, after years of ruthlessly maneuvering supporters into places of power from his place as General Secretary. The purges were a response to what Stalin felt were dangers to the stability of the party. Yet the largest debate lies in Stalin's motives; whether he simply attempting to crush all opposition and secure his position, or were there other reasons to his motives. Stalin's ascent to power after the death of Lenin was complex, and it was only due to Zinoviev's interception and persuasion that Stalin was allowed to keep his place as the General Secretary of the Control Commission. The post was largely an undistinguished administrative one, but Stalin used it to fortify his power base and control over the bureaucracy of the ruling Communist Party. The cause of all the tumult concerning Stalin stemmed from a 'Political Will' compiled by Lenin in his final days, as he foresaw the dangers of the position he had created for Stalin and attempted to warn his comrades against Stalin, urging them to instate somebody better, yet at the death of Lenin, and the reading of the will, Zinoviev stood up and swore Stalin's recent behavior had improved to such an extent that there was no reason to follow Lenin's wishes. ...read more.


This gives weight to the argument that Stalin was indeed eliminating his rivals from the Party, as Kirov was arguably a strong competitor against Stalin, and the effectiveness with which it was covered up and made to look as if Stalin had no implication was impressive, suggesting a well thought out plan. It could be argued that Stalin began what later became the purges as simply a demonstration of his power, the initial purge of party members unfortunately gathered momentum, and within a few years people denounced others in order to shift blame from themselves. This provides a solid piece of evidence for the argument against Stalin's reasons for the purge. The intolerance which gripped society in the time of this great change resulted in distrust on all fronts, enemies were seen everywhere; traitors to the revolution, who wanted to ruin the hard work and accomplishments of the New Russia. The denunciation of such key figures as Trotsky as enemies of the state resulted in people drawing the conclusion that if such important dignitaries could betray the nation, then what about the lesser people? This snowballed and quickly hundreds of people were suspected of traitorous acts. Common people were left to draw the distinction between incompetence and intentional sabotage, which consequently led to any mishap that might arise in the workplace to be blamed on sabotage. Denunciations therefore became commonplace, and no one was safe. They became a means of harming your enemies, as well as proving your patriotism, for by identifying a peer as a traitor, it could perhaps protect you from being named as one. For when 'conspirators' were uncovered, it was not uncommon for their wives and relatives to also be punished and apprehended. It seemed as if the only way to protect yourself was to denounce someone else, fuelling the situation within Russia to one of fear and suspicion. The idea has been put forward that keeping people in constant fear of being arrested was a technique for making them do as Stalin wanted, and at its most basic, this is true. ...read more.


The requisitioning squad were sent out to claim the grain and deal with the 'traitors', and although it is unclear from records whether it was actually being hoarded, the amount that was recorded was nowhere near the amount that was actually seized. The result of this episode was that the grain kept by farmers as seed for next year's harvest were seized and ultimately caused mass famine the following year. In this way Stalin was able to avoid blame by painting the Kulaks as the enemies, and his failures were covered up by tales of sabotage. This shows how the purges were not attempts to rid society of opposition, but in fact simply a way of Stalin retaining his position of power by putting the blame elsewhere. There is no doubt that the purges between 1928 and 1939 were simply to eliminate his rivals. Stalin's paranoia exaggerated the idea that people were plotting against him an as a result his purges intensified. The suicide of Tomsky confirms this. The attack on the Kulaks shows that Stalin did indeed try to rid Russia of particular groups or threats. The purges began with Stalin's desire for unopposed power, as seen in the exile of Trotsky and from then on it simply escalated to massive proportions. 1 The Great Terror: A Reassessment, Robert Conquest, Pimlico, Revised Edition 1990 2 Stalin and Khrushchev the USSR, 1924-64, Michael Lynch, Hodder & Stoughton 1998 3 Stalin and Khrushchev the USSR, 1924-64, Michael Lynch, Hodder & Stoughton 1998 4 The Great Terror: A Reassessment, Robert Conquest, Pimlico, Revised Edition 1990 5 Stalin, Issac Deutscher, Penguin Books, Revised Edition (1966) 6 The Great Terror: A Reassessment, Robert Conquest, Pimlico, Revised Edition (1990) 7 Alexander Dallin and Alan Westin, Politics in the Soviet Union, Harcourt, Brace and World Inc (1966) 8 Alexander Dallin and Alan Westin, Politics in the Soviet Union, Harcourt, Brace and World Inc (1966) 9 The Great Terror: A Reassessment, Robert Conquest, Pimlico, Revised Edition 1990 ?? ?? ?? ?? Alexandra Gaunt Personal Study ...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. Why Stalin was able to hold on to power in the Soviet Union: ...

    However, in the meantime all knowledge of Stalin's purges was being erased, and the myth of his greatness being created. Stalin had finally achieved what he wanted, and his position in power was totally safe, with the army incapable of opposing him, and all opposition amongst the communist party, and throughout the Soviet Union removed.

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

    * There exists four arguments regarding the role of Leni Riefenstahl in Nazi Germany, each has differing opinions on her commitment to Nazism, the extent of her contribution to Nazi propaganda, her relationship with Hitler and Goebbels, her major

  1. .Compare the Characters and beliefs of Lenin and Stalin. Lenin and Stalin had many ...

    However life and factory discipline under Stalin was strict. There were no payments for the unemployed since they were sent straight to another job. So unemployment was almost non-existent. For people unable to work due to illness there were sickness payments provided they had a good record at work.

  2. Causes of show trials + purges of 1930s.

    purge' had been completed.[31] The purge was effective in reaching the goals set out by the CPC, and resulted in 15.6% of the Party being expelled, and another 1.7% having their status in the Party degraded to the rank of 'sympathisers,' which meant that they were not permitted to attend

  1. To what extent was equality achieved under Stalin?

    the national minorities of the vast Russian landmass increased to the degree that they did under Lenin. This is even more significant given that the Provisional Government had refused to give them any degree of autonomy, whereas under the Bolsheviks the national minorities were treated as bona fide Russian citizens.

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

    The triumvirate discredited Trotsky because it capitalised on the 'Cult of Lenin', suggesting that Trotsky was disloyal to the former leader and his ideas. They claimed that his book showed apparent disrespect for Lenin, they questioned his ideology, and they also focused on his lack of activities since the revolution.

  1. Lenin and the Bolshevik revolution.

    the other Bolshevik leaders at least a little credit for having some conviction in their views and some strength in maintaining them. No more need be said about the April Theses, for there really is just too little hard evidence to permit one to draw more substantial conclusions.

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

    Mussolini's instability during this period is shown by the fact that he was forced to tactically resign for a short period and had to give up the pact shortly after. It shows the influence of the ras who had their own powerbases and were usually more radical than Mussolini himself; their views could not be ignored.

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