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

How far do Trotsky(TM)s own misjudgments account for his failure in the power struggle which followed Lenin(TM)s death?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"How far do Trotsky's own misjudgments account for his failure in the power struggle which followed Lenin's death?" Following Lenin's death in 1924, a power vacuum appeared for the leadership of the Communist Party in Russia. A collective leadership was proclaimed, however competition for individual authority between Trotsky, Stalin, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Bukharin, Rykov and Tomsky led to a fierce struggle for power, ending in Stalin's triumph and the beginning of his tenure as the leader of the Communist Party. The strongest contenders in the power struggle were Stalin and Trotsky, however a number of unfortunate decisions and lack of support on Trotsky's part, coupled with Stalin's tactics and power base, led to Trotsky's defeat and exile. It was the latter of the two factors that contributed more to Trotsky's ultimate failure, due to the fact that Stalin's initial position was stronger, and his opportunism allowed him to take advantage of Trotsky's misjudgments, thereby allowing him to take power. However, it is worth noting that the term 'misjudgments' is relative to the historian, since a number of Trotsky's unsuccessful decisions were deliberately made to avoid certain outcomes, therefore cannot accurately be termed 'misjudgments'. Trotsky, although he had a limited power base made up of mostly radicals and students, was in a position of adequate leverage immediately following Lenin's death. He had Lenin's support, as shown in Lenin's testament, "Comrade Trotsky... is distinguished not only by his outstanding ability. ...read more.

Middle

Trotsky especially so, did not pay regard to the threat of Stalin's increasing power base. Regardless of Trotsky's motivation however, the results were the same, he lost his support in the party and was eventually exiled. Trotsky's main shortcomings were offset by Stalin's strengths - mainly - but also Kamenev and Zinoviev's at the beginning. Stalin had built up a strong power base first by controlling party membership through the Lenin Enrolment. This had been a series of structural changes to the party's membership, which had been conducted under Stalin's supervision. This allowed him to weed out elements who were sympathetic to Trotsky, and replace them with poor, uneducated proletarians who supported him instead. Second, Stalin took control of the party's organization, by gaining the ability to select the delegates attending the annual party congress. He could then fill the congress with again, his supporters. Lastly, Stalin also had positions in the Orgburo and the Secretariat. As the General Secretary of the party he was aware of all happenings and could control what was discussed and what information the other party members were given. This power gave him the ability to 'deliver the vote' in party assemblies. He was also involved in publishing the Communist newspaper, Pravda, which gave him a suitable platform for propaganda. Despite this, Stalin was underestimated by all the other contenders. ...read more.

Conclusion

In this case, Trotsky's ill-judgment translated directly into loss of support. Furthermore, Trotsky once again was idle when Lenin's Testament was suppressed. The reasons for this are unclear, although again it is possible that Trotsky did not want to create factionalism or weaken the party. Releasing Lenin's Testament would have weakened the other contenders' positions much more than it would have weakened Trotsky's, since Lenin clearly favored Trotsky as the most competent leader. Instead of seizing the opportunity to improve his position, Trotsky missed a valuable chance to build support for his policies. Trotsky's lack of support, and choice to pursue paths such as campaigning against bureaucratization, which failed to attract the attention of the party members, led to his removal as a candidate for leadership. Stalin's pragmatism and opportunism however, on the other side of the spectrum, allowed him to be victorious in the power struggle and go on to become a major leader of Communist Russia. However, it is clear that Trotsky's misjudgments were not the only cause of his failure, Trotsky's initial position was much weaker than Lenin's, and his unwillingness to take hard stances out of fear of dividing the party held him back. Trotsky's misjudgments then played a minor role in his failure, but the true cause was his lack of future vision and disregard for the need for party support. , ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate History section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

4 star(s)

This is a very good answer which covers all the main points. Some points could be explored with a little more detail and less of a reliance on quotations would also add to its merits. It would also benefit from a clear thesis - which is offered in the conclusion but the answer would be more persuasive if constant references were made to it throughout the essay to add weight to the evidence presented. Nevertheless, a well written answer.

Marked by teacher Natalie Stanley 30/03/2013

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 International Baccalaureate History essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Compare and Contrast the Policies of Alexander II and Alexander III

    3 star(s)

    Tsar Alexander III furthered this Ukaz in his process of Russification. Under Russification, Russian was the only language taught in schools throughout the Empire. Alexander III was wary of the fact that foreign influences must be kept to the minimal.

  2. Why were the central powers defeated in the First World War

    Churchill's war tactics were diversion, weak southern front, sea power, he wanted to attack Germany from the East (this was similar to the Schlieffen plan; war of movement). He wanted to break the deadlock. He also wanted to knock Turkey out of the war and keep Russia in the war.

  1. Analyse the factors that led to the rise of the Communist party in China.

    Their discontent with the empire reached breaking point when failed harvest and floods caused famine. Tzu-hsi managed to gain their support by encouraging them to attack foreigners. This shows how anti-foreign the Chinese were. The rebellion was suppressed by international armies, and the Empress Dowager had to pay indemnities for the damage of foreign property in China.

  2. To what extent was Stalin's rise to power due to his opponents' mistakes?

    A second, rather vain, reason is that they failed to see Stalin as a threat. Trotsky even described him as a "Grey Blur", implying that he was a characterless and boring man without ambitions (MacDonald 65). They didn't notice that he was in fact gathering support in the Party and slowly taking it over (Lee 4).

  1. To What Extent Were Hitlers Policies the Cause of World War II?

    Another such similar political gamble undertaken by Hitler was that of expansion of the German military presence which included the re-militarization of the Rhineland, the expansion of the German navy, the use of Germany's air force in the Spanish civil war, the Rome-Berlin Axis Pact and the Anti-Comintern pact.

  2. The Civil War was not inevitable; it was the result of extremism and failures ...

    However, when new states were added to the Union, it disrupted the balance of power that the South fought so hard to seek. In 1850, the South allowed California to enter as a free state in exchange for strengthening slavery laws.

  1. Compare and contrast the causes and nature of the February and October revolutions in ...

    The streets during the second revolution remained calm, and the population continued with their everyday life as normal. This again stands in contrast to the firing on the crowd of February, and their equally violent reaction. A political comparison is also necessary between the two revolutions.

  2. Examine the impact of foreign intervention on the Spanish Civil War

    Hence, in comparison with the Nationalists, the Republicans lacked weapons and men which was vital to fight against the now strengthened Nationalists, which was supported by the powerful empires of Germany and Italy. On the other hand, United States role was also critical in the Spanish Civil War as oil

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