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

Why did Stalin rather than Trotsky emerge as the leader of the USSR in 1929?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐Why did Stalin rather than Trotsky emerge as the leader of the USSR in 1929? At the time of Lenin?s death in 1924, Stalin?s political future was hanging by a thread. He was, in the opinion of historian Stephen Lee, ?the least impressive of all the candidates for succession?, and Leon Trotsky was regarded as the most likely emerging leader of the USSR. However, within five years, Stalin had outmanoeuvred a series of political opponents to become the absolute leader of the Soviet State, a feat accomplished by his unscrupulous politics and propagandist actions, his facade of moderateness and temporarily centrist stance on key issues like the NEP and the spread of the Revolution, as well as exploitation of the broad power base built up by Stalin throughout his political career to manipulate majorities. However he could not have succeeded in his quest for leadership without a series of misjudgements on Trotsky?s part, such as his failure to canvas support for himself amongst the Bolshevik elite, and most crucially his underestimation of the often pragmatic but distinctly un-idealistic ?comrade card index?. Despite not playing a key role in the October Revolution of 1917, Stalin had steadily built up his reputation in the Bolshevik ...read more.

Middle

Deutscher. Stalin?s utterly unscrupulous politics extended to his abandonment of both the Triumvirate and left-wing politics to gain the support of Bukharin and the right wing with his promotion of Socialism in One Country, a policy that was too gaining support with the public. Thanks to Stalin?s control of the party built up from his power base and also due to the ban on factionalism implemented by Lenin back in 1921, Stalin was able to successfully oust rivals Zinoviev and Kamenev from power too late for them to realise his lack of principles, with Bukharin correctly stating that ?he changes his theories according to whom he needs to get rid of next?. This dramatic change of policy displayed Stalin?s pragmatic approach of supporting the most popular motion and ability to ?bend like a reed? regarding his policies overwhelming the less flexible ideals of his rivals. One of the most important examples of how Stalin?s political initiative is the role he played immediately after Lenin?s death, orchestrating the funeral into a national event and so highly praising of Lenin that he triggered the former leader?s ascension from man to Soviet god. ...read more.

Conclusion

This can be evidenced through Figes? account that ?by the time Lenin came to realise this [underestimation of Stalin] it was...too late? as he had already infiltrated all areas of the Politburo and Orgburo with his supporters and was therefore already on the way to succeeding Lenin before the Bolshevik leader had even died. Trotsky was ?the one man capable of stopping Stalin? according to Figes. However, due to his failure to consolidate his own position within the party and hugely underestimating the potential threat from Stalin thanks to his wide power base, Trotsky left himself vulnerable to being ostracised from the Government and thus essentially paved the way for his opponent to become Lenin?s successor. It was his power base that was the reason Stalin emerged as the new leader of the Bolsheviks; it was his power base that enabled him to exert control over different areas of the party and manipulate party membership so as to guarantee himself majorities against his rivals, most significantly against Trotsky. As for Trotsky himself, ?lacking a power base, he could be no more than a ?prophet in exile?? according to Stephen Lee, powerless to stop Stalin succeeding as the leader of the USSR in 1929. Ciara Lally ...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

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. Comparison between Trotsky's and Lenin's role in the establishment of the USSR

    However, as D. Thatcher suggests, the role of Trotsky during the civil war is not to be exaggerated. So it is fair to say that Lenin's policy was likely to be more important in keeping the Bolsheviks in power than Trotsky's efforts, although they were very important.

  2. Lenin's Role in Creation of USSR

    Lenin's introduction of War Communism further proved to be a vital step for the Bolshevik victory. The main changes under War Communism were that, all industry was nationalised and strict centralisation was introduced, workers discipline was strict and strikers could be shot, food and most commodities were rationed and distributed in a centralised way.

  1. Rise of Castro and Stalin

    Castro then removed all counter -revolutionaries, who were condemned by Castro's mobs, shot or given long prison terms. Several of his rivals were executed, died in plane crashes, fled into exile or settled into obscurity. These he replaced with others who were more complacent, and would offer no blockades to his power.

  2. Compare and Contrast the foreign/domestic policies of one right wing and one left wing ...

    o The excellent growing weather of 1958 was followed by a very poor growing year in 1959. Some parts of China were hit by floods. In other growing areas, drought was a major problem o between 1959 and 1962, it is thought that 20 million people died of starvation or

  1. USSR under Stalin

    are they chased whether Source B only mentions that the kulaks were divided into three categories and deported or killed according to the category they fall into. Both sources claim that collectivisation was a new concept for the Soviet society and began a new era for the country as ''collectivisation

  2. IB History HL, Extended Notes: Russia, the Tsars, the Provisional Govenment and the Revolution.

    Alexander III could be seen as the reformer and Alexander II as the reactionary to a limited extent. Nicholas II 1894-1917 Personality and training 1. Did not posses the commanding character of his father or grandfather. Possessed great personal charm but hated conflict.

  1. How successful was Khrushchev as Soviet Leader?

    Censorship laws were eased slightly, allowing great literature like Alexander Solzhenitsyn?s Gulag Archipelago. However this was not the case with all books such as Dr. Zhivago as it became clear in Khrushchev?s Russia that only certain critical literature was permitted to be published; critics of Stalin.

  2. He brought his country and his people nothing but harm. To what extent do ...

    sufficiently to fund industrial growth, yet at a great cost to both peasant livelihood and lives. Despite from Stalin?s perspective the scheme being a success, the policy had significant limitations that ultimately countered any success it had had. The most significant occurrence of this was the significant lapse in production

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